Satya Prakash Singh @ Tunna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65932 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2022 Thana- PARASI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
SATYA PRAKASH SINGH @ TUNNA KUMAR S/O Ramdil Singh R/O Village- Bahadurpur, P.S- Parasi, District- Arwal 2.
ANKIT KUMAR @ JHUNNA SINGH S/O Ramdil Singh R/O VillageBahadurpur, P.S- Parasi, District- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv.
:
Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP :
Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 27-03-2023 Earlier vide order dated 24.02.2023, this application with regard to petitioner no.2 by dismissed as withdrawn. Hence, this matter survives with regard to petitioner no.1 only. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 504, 506, 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the learned court below.
As per the prosecution case, after taking the money the petitioner has not returned back the amount worth of Rs.2,31,000/- to the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65932 of 2022(4) dt.27-03-2023 2/3 Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner has given Rs. 17,00,000/- to the informant and informant has returned back only Rs. 3,40,000/- to the petitioner. He submits that the present case has not been filed with a view to seek justice rather only with a view to save skin from Arwal P.S. Case No. 210/2022. He further submits that petitioner have got two criminal antecedents as stated in para-3 of the bail application.
Learned APP for the State along with learned counsel for the informant opposes for prayer for bail and submits that petitioner has not returned the amount to the informant. Hence, he does not deserve anticipatory bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that there is money related dispute between the parties, let the petitioner no.1, named above, in the event of his arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court below, where the case is pending/Successor court, in connection with Parasi P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65932 of 2022(4) dt.27-03-2023 3/3 No.39/2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T