Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1988/2024bail rejected

Harsh Chauhan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-01-24Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1988 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-359 Year-2023 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Harsh Chauhan S/O- Amar Singh R/O- Bhuteshwar Colony, P.S.- Shikandr Rao, Dist- Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, Pin-204215. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar, Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vishal Vikram Rana, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 24-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 359 of 2023, lodged on 16.08.2023 under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against 3 named accused persons including the present petitioner against whom the allegation is that they used to take cheque in the name of PNB Metlife of Rs. 175/- and Rs. 180/- and subsequently, converted the cheque by making interpolation into lakhs and odd and draw the money from the account of the innocent victims.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1988 of 2024(2) dt.24-01-2024 2/2 also submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 16.08.2023. Counsel further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in this case.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the entire action of fraud has been committed in connivance with each other.

6. Upon specific query of the Court from the counsel for petitioner that whether charge has been framed in this case or not, counsel submits that he is not aware that whether charge has been framed or not.

7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 359 of 2023, pending before the learned J.M. 1st Class, Hilsa (Nalanda) is hereby rejected.

9. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Divyansh/- U T