Shankar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1330 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2022 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== 1.

Shankar Kumar S/O Late Kishori Prasad R/O Mohalla- Koyari Bari, Near Koyari Bari Phatak, P.S- Civil Line, Gaya, Distt.- Gaya. 2.

Rinku Kumar S/O Late Kishori Prasad R/O Mohalla- Koyari Bari, Near Koyari Bari Phatak, P.S- Civil Line, Gaya, Distt.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Vijay Sao S/O Late Jagdish Sao R/O Village- Salempur, P.S- Gaya Mufassil, Distt.- Gaya.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-02-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 229 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable u/s 406 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. As per the prosecution case, the complainant along

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1330 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3 with the petitioner no. 1(Mediator) went to the house of the accused persons for the negotiation of the marriage of her daughter. On the day of engagement, the complainant gave Rs. 2 lakhs to the petitioner no.2. Later, the accused persons demanded extra Rs. 3 Lakhs, upon which, the complainant refused to give any extra money and asked to return the money. Further, the accused persons assaulted the son of the complainant and took Rs. 5,000/- from the pocket of the complainant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioners had neither demanded any money from the complainant nor they have received any amount of Rs. 2 lakhs from the complainant for marriage with the daughter of the complainant. It is further submitted that petitioners have no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioners.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of offence levelled against the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1330 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 3/3 petitioners, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Gaya in connection with Complaint Case No. 229 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. This application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Ranjeet/- U T