Ram Pravesh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72713 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-599 Year-2017 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ram Pravesh Thakur Son of Late Raj Nandan Thakur, Resident of VillagePremnagar, Tole Bahori, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, Distric-Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.V.R.P. Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Choubey Jawahar, APP For the Informant :

Mr.Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate Mr.Santosh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for State.

The petitioner in this case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 599 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is an employee of the brother of the informant and he was looking for the Gaushala of his brother and for that the amount was given to the petitioner for utilizing the same towards maintenance of the Gaushala.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72713 of 2019(2) dt.18-12-2019 2/3 Learned APP for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein from perusal of the FIR itself it appears that the whole allegation against the petitioner is that he had received a sum of Rs.

90,000/- by way of loan from the informant about 7 years back but has not returned the same and the case has been lodged for purpose of recovery of money and it is the stand of the petitioner that he happened to be an employee of the brother of the informant and he was looking for the Gaushala of his brother and for that the amount was given to the petitioner for utilizing the same towards maintenance of the Gaushala, let the petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (fifteen thousand ) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 599 of 2017, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.

C. i.e.

(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72713 of 2019(2) dt.18-12-2019 3/3 (ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/ved U T