Birendra Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87105 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-695 Year-2016 Thana- BUXAR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictBuxar ============================================== BIRENDRA THAKUR Son of Late Hridyanand Thakur Resident of Jaso Road, Near Brahma Asthan Golumber, P.S.-Mufassil Buxar, DistrictBuxar. office Address-(Director) Aryan Agro Project India Ltd. office Chhotaki Sarimpur Near Kali Mandir Buxar, P.S-Buxar Town, DistrictBuxar. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Babita Tiwari Wife of Sri Nagendra Tiwari Resident of Village-Jaso, P.S.- Buxar Mufassil, District-Buxar.

... ... Opposite Parties ============================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Malay Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh ============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-06-2020 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned Advocate assisted by Ms. Vaishnavi Singh learned Advocate, for the petitioner and Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Maruti Kumari, learned Advocate for the complainant/opposite party no. 2. The State is represented by Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP.

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 695 (C) of 2016 in which cognizance has been taken under Sections

2/4 420, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation in the complaint petition is that on the assurance of the petitioner, the complainant / opposite party no. 2 invested some money for which a bond was executed and given to her. Before she could liquidate the bond, the petitioner closed the office and ran away. Many persons are alleged to have been duped and cheated by the petitioner.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in fact the complainant also was part of the management of Aryan Agro Project India Limited and she had also collected money on behalf of the company. When other investors started demanding money, she though it safer to lodge a case against the Director and other officials of such non banking company.

Apart from this, it has been alleged that the bond was sought to be redeemed even before the maturity date. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Sr. Advocate for the complainant / opposite party no. 2 has tried to show this Court that the bond, which were executed and given to the

3/4 complainant / opposite party no. 2 bears the signature of the petitioner.

However from the records, it appears that one Avinash Kumar Thakur has been granted anticipatory bail vide Criminal Miscellaneous No. 57952 of 2018 by order dated 07.12.2018.

Regard being had to the nature of accusation against the petitioner, he is directed to be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar, in connection with Complaint Case No. 695 (C) of 2016, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not leave the territorial confines of the State of Bihar without seeking permission of the Court below.

4/4 In case, it is found that the petitioner is not participating in the legal proceeding against him, it would be open to the complaint / opposite party no. 2 to move the Court below for cancellation of his anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) sunilkumar/- U T