Pramod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.48109 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -558 Year- 2017 Thana -NAWADA District- NAWADA ====================================================== Pramod Kumar, Son of Kailash Kumar Mehta, R/o Village-Beli Sharif, P.S.-Nawada, District-Nawada.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-12-2017 Heard the counsel for the parties.
The petitioners seek bail in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 558 of 2017 dated 20.08.2017 instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 467, 471, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been alleged by one Rahul Kumar in the F.I.R that Kailash Kumar Mehta, father of the petitioner, projected himself as a retired Judge and had promised to provide employment to the informant and others. When the appointment was not given to the informant and others, the son of the aforesaid Kailash Kumar Mehta, who is the petitioner here had promised the informant and others for providing them job in Bandhan bank. It has been alleged that for the aforesaid purpose, the informant paid
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48109 of 2017 (3) dt.07-12-2017 2/3 to the petitioner an amount of rupees three lakhs. The F.I.R appears to have been signed by nine other persons who also claim to have been cheated by the petitioner. Other persons also have paid different amounts to the petitioner for getting job in Bandhan bank.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the F.I.R itself, it would appear that the informant and others were provided training in Kolkata for six months. If this statement in the F.I.R is accepted to be true, then it can safely be inferred, it has been argued, that pursuant to the interview and other formalities, the informant and others were provided job. It appears rather strange that even after getting the job, such an allegation has been levelled against the petitioner. Be that as it may, during the course of investigation, nothing concrete could be collected against the petitioner.
The investigation papers contain temporary appointment letter of Rahul Kumar. The bank account of aforesaid Rahul Kumar and some part of the bank statement of the informant has also been annexed with the investigation papers, which do not reveal anything except for some transaction of money at the instance of the informant.
The petitioner is in custody since 21.07.2017.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48109 of 2017 (3) dt.07-12-2017 3/3 It has been submitted that now the charge-sheet has been submitted and if the petitioner is released on bail, he would not be in any position to tamper with the evidence. Regard being had to the aforesaid facts as also taking into account the period of custody, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
The petitioner, above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 558 of 2017.
It is, however, made clear that the petitioner shall participate in the trial and any attempt to impede the timely conclusion of the trial by the petitioner would entitle the State to proceed for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (Ashutosh Kumar, J) Shageer/- U T