Rajdeo Pd Singh @ Rajdeo Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70577 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1388 Year-2017 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== RAJDEO PD SINGH @ RAJDEO SINGH Son of Late Saryug Prasad Singh R/o Paraspatti (Near Science College), Simra, Sitamarhi, P.s. - Dumra, Distt. - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Daya Shankar Tiwary Son of Late Baidyanath Tiwary R/o Mazar Gali, Shiekhpura, P.S. - Shastri Nagar, Distt. - Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishnand Jha For the State :

Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad For the Complainant :

Mr. Pawan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 31-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Complaint Case No. 1388(C) of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M.-IX, Patna.

3. The complainant alleged that the petitioner has taken Rs. 4 lakh and promised to return within 6 months. Thereafter, the petitioner gave a cheque to the complainant which was returned by the Bank upon presentation with an endorsement "refer to drawer". The Bank asked the complainant to change the cheque as the same was too old. The complainant approached the petitioner, but the petitioner refused to change the same.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70577 of 2023(3) dt.31-01-2024 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that it is a civil/money dispute between the parties, therefore, no criminal case is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., has been issued against the petitioner, thereafter, the petitioner has filed an application for anticipatory bail in the learned Court below and on that basis the learned Court below dismissed his application for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the fact that the process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., has been issued against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T