Manish Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42653 of 2015 (2) dt.09-10-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42653 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3143 Year- 2011 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA ====================================================== Manish Singh, S/O Santosh Singh, R/O Renter in the hosue of Shankar Prasad, Lallu Babu Ka Kucha, Kurmi Tola, Hajiganj, P.S.-Chowk, DistrictPatna, at present Narkel Danga, Khalbridge Main Road, Kolkata, Pin Coe 700011.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ramanand Prasad Yadav, Ex. Forc, R/O Mahar Tola, Dariyapur Gola, P.S.- Kadamkuan, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nityanand Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 3143(C) of 2011 registered under Sections 406, 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act pending in the court of J.M. Ist Class, Patna. The allegation of complainant, Ramanand Prasad, Ex. Military Personnel, is that accused no. 1, Badri Prasad Yadav, persuaded him to do the work for establishing the Tower on depositing the security money in M/S Infinity Realcom Pvt. Ltd. The complainant handed over two cheques of Rs. six lac in the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42653 of 2015 (2) dt.09-10-2015 name of Director, M/S Infinity Realcom Pvt. Ltd. but the work was not provided. On making complained two cheques, one of Rs. 2,00,000/- and other of 3,75.000/-, were issued signed by the petitioner but the same were not encased and dishonored. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the simply employee in the said company and had issued two cheque on the instruction of the company. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which would be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T