Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1456 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-392 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.
Raj Son Of Birendra Singh Resident Of Vyapur, Maner, P.S. - Maner, District - Patna 2.
Vishal Kumar Son Of Jay Kumar Singh Resident Of Naya Gram Jamunipur, P.S. - Maner, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mukesh Kumar Sinha Son Of Late Mithlesh Kumar Resident Of Choa Lal Lane, N.B. Road, Patna City, District - Patna - 08, Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with C.A. Case No. 392 of 2023 registered under Sections 393, 341, 379, 384, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, the complainant took a loan of Rs. 27 lacs from the petitioners for business purpose. The complainant paid loan amount of Rs. 23,01,852/- in installments from 03.03.2022 to 20.03.2023. It is further alleged that the complainant held a meeting with petitioners for settlement of remaining dues but during course of meeting, petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1456 of 2024(4) dt.17-05-2024 2/3 committed chaos and demanded that the amount which has been paid by the complainant was only the interest of the principal amount and Rs. 27,00,000/- lacs has to be paid. It is also alleged that petitioners snatched gold chain of the complainant and also took away the bike of his brother-in-law.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submission is that no offence is made out under Sections 379 and 384 of the I.P.C., as the complainant had taken loan from the petitioners but failed to return the same, therefore, the allegation of ransom demand could not be attracted against the petitioners. It is next submitted that when the petitioners demanded their dues from the complainant, the complainant has filed the present case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioners be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1456 of 2024(4) dt.17-05-2024 3/3 bonds of Rs. 10,000 (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Patna City, Patna in connection with C.A. Case No. 392 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T