Ankit Pandey @ Ankit Kumar Pandey @ Aniket Pandey @ Aniket Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.52207 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -206 Year- 2015 Thana -CHAKIA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Ankit Pandey @ Ankit Kumar Pandey @ Aniket Pandey @ Aniket Kumar Pandey, son of Shri Surendra Pandey, resident of village- Pataura Lala Tola, P.S.- Motihari Muffassil, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.52635 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -206 Year- 2015 Thana -CHAKIA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Manjeet Kumar, son of Sri Suresh Mishra, resident of village- Damodarpur, Police Station- Mehsi, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.52646 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -206 Year- 2015 Thana -CHAKIA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Chandra Mohan Chaudhary @ Chandra Mohan Chaudhur, son of Shatrughan Chaudhary, resident of village- Darhar, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.52207 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ansul, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.Dayal, APP (In Cr.Misc. No.52635 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary-1, APP (In Cr.Misc. No.52646 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
2/4 ORAL ORDER 30-01-2016 These three cases arise out of Chakia P.S. Case No.206 of 2015 registered under Sections 420, 120B, 467, 468, 471 and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3, 4 and 13 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999. The respective petitioners of these cases seek bail in connection with aforesaid Chakia P.S. Case No.206 of 2015. They were arrested in the month of September, 2015 and since then they are in custody.
A common argument has been advanced on behalf of the petitioners that there is no truth behind the allegations made in the FIR. The petitioners were employees of UAE Exchange and Financial Service Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The Reserve Bank of India has issued licence to the company for dealing in foreign currency. No illegality was committed by any of the employees of the company in transacting any business and the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent.
It has been further argued that on completion of investigation the police have already submitted charge-sheet in the case and the petitioners having got roots in the society are not likely to abscond or tamper with the evidence.
3/4 Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.
Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners, namely, Ankit Pandey @ Ankit Kumar Pandey @ Aniket Pandey @ Aniket Kumar Pandey (Cr.Misc.No. 52207 of 2015) , Manjeet Kumar (Cr.Misc.No. 52635 of 2015) and Chandra Mohan Chaudhary @ Chandra Mohan Chaudhur (Cr.Misc.No. 52646 of 2015) are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Chakia P.S. Case No.206 of 2015 subject to the following conditions:
(i) the petitioners shall not influence the witnesses or tamper with any document;
(ii) the petitioners shall not leave the limits of India without prior permission of the trial court;
(iii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such fact to the Court;
(iv) the petitioners shall not do any act prejudicial to the interest of the prosecution;
(v) the petitioners shall receive the police report and other documents in terms of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as and when the same is supplied to them by the Court;
4/4 (vi) one of the sureties must be a Government servant/elected people's representative of Panchayat/Municipality; and the other shall be a close relative; and (vii) the petitioners shall abide by the above conditions scrupulously and in case of violation of any of the conditions, the prosecution would be at liberty to move the Court for cancellation of bail.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T