Sunny Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62043 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2022 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== SUNNY KUMAR SINGH S/O Mithlesh Kumar Singh R/O Mohalla- Rauza, P.S- Ara Town, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleges that the petitioner received money in excess of the work done in connivance with the officials with respect to 6 projects relating to Ara Municipality. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner is a contractor and he had completed the work, it is also submitted that in the present F.I.R. it is alleged that several works were allotted to the contractor but the petitioner was allotted only work relating to Agreement No. 39 of 2019 and 2020 and the said work was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62043 of 2022(2) dt.07-12-2022 2/2 completed within time and, thereafter, his entire payment was also made. It is submitted that petitioner till date has not received the entire payment despite completing the work. It is also submitted that before instituting the present F.I.R., at least a show cause ought to have been issued to the petitioner for explaining his side of a case then perhaps, the present F.I.R. would not have been instituted. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 180 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Harsh/ShubhamU T