Pramod Kumar Pandit @ Pramod Pandit v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.44032 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -134 Year- 2013 Thana -PARBATTA District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================
1. Pramod Kumar Pandit @ Pramod Pandit, Son of Jagarnath Pandit, resident of Village- Sadhua Tola, P.S.- Ranjra, District Bhagalpur, at present residing at Gandhi Gram, P.s.- Barari, District- Katinar. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Nik Lal Yadav, Son of Late Manilal Yadav, resident of Jagatpur, P.S.- Parbatta, District- Bhagalpur.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 16-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Informant.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 134 of 2013, registered for offences punishable under Sections 120 B. 406, 467, 468, 471, 472, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out and out preposterous allegations has been made against the petitioner on various dates. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegation the petitioner took into his bank account several lacs of rupees from the complainant and also made complainant to
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44032 of 2015 (4) dt.16-02-2016 2/3 deposit different amounts in the bank accounts of his wife and his daughter. The story that the said deposits were made on verbal assurance of the petitioner that he would arrange to provide a job to the son of the complainant, appears to be a concocted one. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that actually the petitioner had been using different pretext for cheating the complainant and in all more than Rs. 8,00,000/- were deposited by the complainant in the bank account of the petitioner as well as other bank accounts provided by the petitioner.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that many stories have been carved out at different points of time but the real reason behind the said transactions appears to be vague. It is further submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State that save and except the allegations made in the complaint petition, there is no further cogent material on record so as to prove the guilt of the petitioner.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances, and also that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44032 of 2015 (4) dt.16-02-2016 3/3 furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 (Rs. Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. Naugachia, in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 134 of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Anjana Mishra, J) sunil/- U T