Chandra Vijay Prakash v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74937 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2023 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== Chandra Vijay Prakash S/O- Sri Jay Prakash Yadav Village- Ram Patti W.No6, P.S.- Singheshwar Dist- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 29-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No.61 of 2023, lodged on 18.03.2023 under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 474, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per FIR, the allegation has been made against accused persons is that he has demanded Rs. 3,15000/- from the informant to provide service in Civil Court, Motihari. Out of the said money, only Rs. 3,8000/- has been paid by the informant to the petitioner. It has been alleged that an appointment letter was also provided to him. When the informant reached Civil Court, Motihari then he got information that the said letter is forged. Thereafter, he has filed this case. As the petitioner has not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74937 of 2023(2) dt.29-11-2023 2/3 returned the money and in arranging the said money informant has sold his land also.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that petitioner is also victim of the said occurrence as the same other persons have taken money. Counsel further submits that petitioner's antecedent is clean and he is in custody since 03.07.2023.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that paying money in the name of service is also illegal.
6. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that he is poor person and upon selling the land arrange some money in lieu of job but the accused has grabbed his money.
7. Upon specific query whether charge has been framed or not. Counsel submits that as per his knowledge, charge has not been framed till date.
8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74937 of 2023(2) dt.29-11-2023 3/3
9. However, liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J) shweta/- U T