Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32303/2017dismissed

Umesh Rai v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-10-18Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32303 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2217 Year- 2014 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Umesh Rai, son of Mahendra Rai, resident of mohalla - Gandhi Chowk, Pokhra, P.S. Hajipur Town, District - Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Lalbabu Singh son of Bhaguadev Singh, resident of mohalla - Nandpuri Bhagwanpur, P.S. Sadar, District - Muzaffarpur. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : APP For Opp. Party No. 2 : Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 18-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for anticipatory bail in connection with Trial No. 1890 of 2016 arising out of Complaint Case No. 2217 of 2014 for the offences alleged under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code having earlier been rejected by this Court by order dated 17.09.2016 in Cr. Misc. No. 36372 of 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and a separate first information report in Vaishali Town P.S. Case 614 of 2014 has been filed by the daughter of the complainant with respect to a cheque of Rs. 3,00,000/- given by the complainant to the petitioner on the occasion of her marriage. It is further submitted that the present case has been filed by the complainant in retaliation to Town P.S. Case No. 615 of 2014 filed by the petitioner against the informant and the witnesses of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32303 of 2017 (4) dt.18-10-2017 2/2 present complaint.

4. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran U T