Bikram Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17194 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -128 Year- 2017 Thana -RUPASPUR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Bikram Choudhary S/o Sri Rohan Choudhary, R/o Saubhagya Sharma Path, Rukanpura, P.S.- Rupaspur, Distt.- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendra Kumar Pathak For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2018 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 128/17, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 120 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner that he took Rs. 24,50,000/- from the informant for execution of sale deed of a land in favour of the informant but neither the land was executed in favour of the informant nor the money was returned. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in fact that the informant had taken Rs.

30,00,000/- on different dates from the petitioner to execute a sale deed of five kathas of land situated in Hajipur, in his favour, which will be evident from Annexure - 2, which is an agreement for execution of sale deed with respect to aforesaid land and the informant only to avoid the payment of Rs. 30,00,000/- to the petitioner, has filed the present false and concocted case.

Heard learned A.P.P. also as well as learned counsel for

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17194 of 2018 (3) dt.23-04-2018 2/2 the informant. They have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that no such agreement has been entered into between the informant and petitioner for execution of sale deed in Hajipur and petitioner has failed to produce the original documents of agreement in the court below also and has come with this false story.

In reply to the above, submission of learned counsel for the informant, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the original papers of agreement was lost, for which he has lodged a Sanha on 12.12.2017. However, the said plea of the petitioner cannot be acceded to as the present case was lodged in the month of May 2017.

Having heard both sides, considering the above discussions, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail, the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

The petitioner if so desire may surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail, which will be considered by the court below on the merit of the case, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T