Aditya Kumar @ Amresh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67830 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2021 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== ADITYA KUMAR @ AMRESH KUMAR YADAV S/O YOGENDRA YADAV @ BHOGENDRA KAIBAR @ BHOGENDRA YADAV Resident of village- Tulsiyahi, P.S.- Khajauli, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madhubala Verma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 22-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 406, 420, 354(B)©, 386, 387 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner is a dummy income tax officer and showing the influence of government job, he performed marriage with the daughter of the informant and got prepared marriage affidavit before the Notary Public with some ulterior motive. Later on, informant's daughter came to know the real picture of the petitioner and dissolved the marriage, which was only known to some of his relatives. Taking advantage of this fact, petitioner pressurized the informant to give him an amount of Rs. 5 lac otherwise he will make viral the photographs of informant's daughter. It is further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67830 of 2022(2) dt.22-03-2023 2/2 alleged that informant committed theft in his house. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He is innocent. Informant had kept pass book ATM and other document of the petitioner and only with a view to implicate him in a false case, he had got transfer some money in his account from the account of informant's son. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 16.04.2022. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the above facts and period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJMVI, Patna City, Patna in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 140 of 2021.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) manishkumar/- U