Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1416 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2021 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Chaudhary, Son of Rambriksh Chaudhary, R/o Village- Kerma, P.S. - Kudhni, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Fahimuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 18-01-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Minapur P.S. Case no. 77 of 2021, registered under sections 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code to which section 120B of Indian Penal Code and section 3 of the B.P.I.D Act were added subsequently.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that he was induced by the accused persons including this petitioner in becoming a member of the Cooperative Society. The informant was assured that it is a fully registered Society having its local office in Gaighat and head office in Muzaffarpur. However after becoming an agent and having deposited money of 550-560 persons, the accused persons closed the local office as well as the head office and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1416 of 2024(2) dt.18-01-2024 2/3 disappeared.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no concern with the Society in question. The reason for his false implication is that he happens to be the full brother of one Anil Kumar, who happens to be one of the founders of the Society as also the Director of the same. The reason of the petitioner being implicated by the informant is that the informant having deposited the money of large number of investors in the capacity of his being an agent, to save his own skin has now falsely implicated this petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 13.7.2023 and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in the FIR, contents of the order of the learned trial Court, the petitioner being in custody since 13.7.2023 and charge-sheet having been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Minapur P.S. Case no. 77 of 2021, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1416 of 2024(2) dt.18-01-2024 3/3 satisfaction of the learned Court no.8, Judicial Magistrate Ist, Muzaffarpur.
(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T