Deepak Kumar Karna v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83890 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-447 Year-2019 Thana- BUXAR District- Buxar ====================================================== Deepak Kumar Karna S/O Sri Prasad Lal Resident of Mohalla- Mukhiyaje Marg, Kalyanvas, P.S.- Kalyanpuri, Purvi Delhi, State- Delhi. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Om Prakash son of THakur Prasad Shastri at-Bypass Road, Sanichara baba Mandir(near), Police Station Buxar(M), Dist- Buxar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pritam Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 22-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in Buxer Town P.S. Case No. 447 of 2019 registered under Sections-420, 406, 467, 468 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. A number of adjournments have already been given and it is not possible to give further adjournments to learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. The informant is in appearance.
5. According to allegation, the informant was willing to perform printing work. In the meanwhile, he came into contact with the petitioner who is proprietor of Digital India. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83890 of 2024(8) dt.22-09-2025 2/2 petitioner agreed to install the printing machine and memorandum of understanding was prepared. The informant paid Rs. 4,81,500/- in the bank accounts of the persons indicated by them but the petitioner and the other accused persons neither refunded his money nor installed the printing machine and they committed cheating with the informant.
6. A number of adjournments have already been given to the petitioner in this matter.
7. Perusal of order dated 13-08-2025 passed by a coordinate bench of this court shows that the matter was referred to Patna High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre but the petitioner did not appear before the Mediator Centre.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled for privilege of anticipatory bail and accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U T