It has been alleged that the informant had sold a land and had kept Rs. 2,50,000/- for the marriage of his daughter. It has been alleged that the petitioner had induced the informant to hand over the said amount to him to get it doubled in six months’ time. The money was not returned and as such the marriage of his daughter also could not be solemnized. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He has further referred to a bainanama which indicates that Rs. 2,50,000/- was given by the informant to Firdaus Sk., Julu Rahman and Akirul Sk. Learned senior counsel has also referred to a compromise and has stated that in the FIR the allegation is with respect to making the amount doubled while in the compromise petition, the reference has been made to a loan and the informant had agreed for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-. He has stated that the compromise which has been brought on record itself is a dubious piece of document. Learned senior counsel thus submits that the petitioner is a respectable person of the locality and the privilege of anticipatory bail be extended to him.
