Raj Kumar Sudhanshu @ Rajkumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81205 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2020 Thana- VIJAYEPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Raj Kumar Sudhanshu @ Rajkumar Ram Son of Juthan Ram Resident of Village- Rampur, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, Distt.- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Ramnath Tiwari S/O-Late Kedarnath Tiwari R/O- Romipur, P.S- Vijaipur, Dist- Gopalganj ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, Advocate For the Informant/s :
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 03-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned counsel for the informant Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey and Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution based on complaint case is that one Umanath Ram who was related to the complainant came to him with the petitioner and they tried to persuade the complainant to invest in Inds Bare Industries Limited, but on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81205 of 2024(4) dt.03-03-2025 2/3 that day, the complainant and his wife were not ready to invest. It is further alleged that on next dates other accused persons arrived and they took different amounts.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. From perusal of the complaint petition, it transpires that only allegation against the petitioner is that on 17.01.2011, he has gone to the complainant with one Umanath Ram and has persuaded the complainant to invest but the complainant was not ready to invest. There is no other allegation against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 29.08.2024.
5. Learned APP appearing for the state and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of regular bail and submits that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Vijayipur P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81205 of 2024(4) dt.03-03-2025 3/3 Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-XIV, Gopalganj. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U