Priyanka Kumari @ Smt. Priyanka Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56833 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9256 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== PRIYANKA KUMARI @ SMT. PRIYANKA KUMARI, W/O Sri Munna Kumar R/O Mohalla- Mobarakpur, Danapur Cantt, Ps. Danapur, Dist. Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

RAJEEV RANJAN, S/O Jainandan Kashyap Resident Of Krishna Bihari Colony, Near Open Birla Mind School, Ps. Ramkrishna Nagar, Dist. Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Md. Rahmatullah, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP For Opposite Party No.2 :

Mr. Uday Pd. Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-12-2023 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that the complainant entered into partnership with some partners including the petitioner and agreed to invest money and open a hospital with the contribution. It is further alleged that on one pretext or another they canceled the partnership deed against three partners and entered into a new partnership agreement between four partners and as per agreement they have not returned Rs. 80,000/- to the complainant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56833 of 2023(3) dt.06-12-2023 2/2 that at best it is a case of breech of agreement and does not entail any criminal liability. There is no allegation that the petitioner has any fraudulent or dishonest intention from the inception and hence no case of cheating is made out. Petitioner is a lady and claims clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed.

7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, in connection with Patna Complaint Case No.9256 of 2022, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T