Pramod Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61331 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2045 Year-2021 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== PRAMOD RAM Son of Late Sahdeo Hajra R/v- Chintamanpur, P.S.- Malahi, District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

KRISHNA PD. Son of Late Yogendra Pd R/v- Chandmari Chowk, Ward No.-28, P.S.- Motihari Nagar, District- East Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, APP For O.P. No.2 :

Mr. Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 17-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.2045 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant gave Rs.6,80,000/- to the petitioner in January, 2021 with condition that the petitioner would return the said amount in March, 2021. It is also alleged that petitioner had given a cheque of Rs.6,80,000/- to the informant, but when the informant presented the cheque in the bank, the same got dishonoured due to insufficient balance.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61331 of 2022(3) dt.17-07-2023 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail petition. It is further submitted that O.P. No.2 has not produced any document to show that he had given the said amount to the petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the fact that there is money dispute between the parties, let petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Complaint Case No.2045 of 2021, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) S.KUMAR/- U T