Dharmendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63469 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2019 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== DHARMENDRA KUMAR Son of Ramanand Sharma Resident of Village - Mogalpura Police Chowki, Near Devi Asthan, P.S.- Khajekallan, dist.- Patna . Presently Posted as Customer Manager Mahindra @ Mahindra Financial Services Ltd. Kankerbagh Branch, 2nd Floor, Milan Complex, main Road, Kankerbagh, Patna.-800020 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Sumiran Sinha W/o Rishav Sinha Resident of Village - Janki Lavan Apartment, Flat No.101, Shree Krishnapuram, P.S. Rupaspur , Danapur, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shivendra Kumar Roy For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 21-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 341, 354, 447, 379 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Rupaspur P.S.Case No. 202 of 2019.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the present FIR has been instituted as a counterblast one day after the FIR in Krishnapuri P.S.Case No. 134 of 2019 (Annexure-3), lodged by the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner as Customer

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63469 of 2019(2) dt.21-10-2019 2/3 Manager of Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd., Kankarbagh Branch had visited the residence of the informant's husband, who was a borrower, but he was beaten up and sustained injury (Annexure-4). It is surprising that even though the informant in her Fardbeyan had not identified the petitioner, he has been made accused by name in the FIR. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of petitioner's arrest or surrender before court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner be released 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 ACJM, 2nd, Danapur in connection with Rupaspur P.S.Case No. 202 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. and also subject to the following further conditions:

(i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63469 of 2019(2) dt.21-10-2019 3/3 (iii) That the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) HR/- U T