Allowed

Priya Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 May 2023CR. MISC./3563/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a cheating and forgery FIR arising from an alleged deposit-collection scam by a company. The court found no allegation that they controlled the company's affairs and granted anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties of like amount, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

Priya Kumari Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3563 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2022 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-

¶3

Aurangabad

¶4

======================================================

¶5

PRIYA KUMARI Daughter of Vinod Prasad Residence of Village and P.O.Baluganj (Baluganj Barandi), P.S.- Dhibra, District - Aurangabad (Bihar), Pin Code - 824202.

¶6

Meera Devi Wife of Vinod Prasad Residence of Village and P.O.- Baluganj (Baluganj Barandi), P.S.- Dhibra, District - Aurangabad (Bihar), Pin Code - 824202.

¶7

Puja Kumari Wife of Romi Kumar Residence of Village - Barun Khemda, P.S.- Barun, District - Aurangabad (Bihar), Pin Code - 824112

¶8

... ... Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar

¶11

Amrendra Kumar Son of Late Madan Kumar Tiwari Residence of Village - Arki, P.O.- Arki, P.S.- Dev, District - Aurangabad (Bihar).

¶12

... ... Opposite Parties

¶13

============== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s For the State For the Informant ==============	===== : : : =====	=================================== Mr. Rajendra Narain, Sr. Advocate Mr.Alok Ranjan, Advocate Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP Mr.Santosh Kr. Pandey, Advocate ===================================
CORAM: HONOU	RABL	E MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 15-05-2023

¶15

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners, learned

¶16

counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

¶17

The petitioners in the present case, are seeking prearrest bail in connection with Aurangabad (Town) P.S. Case No. 200 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 473, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They have no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph ‘3’ of the application.

¶18

As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3563 of 2023(2) dt.15-05-2023 2/3

¶20

that on 01.07.2022, Vinod Prasad and Pawan Kumar Gupta came and told that they are in need of a shop on rent for running Ujjawal Institute of Education Technology and Bekhauf Indian News Channel and business. They entered into an agreement and took seven shops on rent. Vinod Prasad and other accused persons including the petitioners were made the Board of Directors of the said company. The accused persons after hatching conspiracy started convincing people to deposit money in the company through mobile Net Banking. The informant and others invested money in the said company of the accused persons. Thereafter the accused persons have absconded by locking the shop after receiving money from the informant and others.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that no specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioners. The specific allegation is against Vinod Prasad and Pawan Kumar Gupta.

¶22

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

¶23

Having regard to the nature of disputes in which it which it is alleged that a sum of Rs. 3 Lakhs remained outstanding as rent, so far as these petitioners are concerned, they have been made accused only because they were on the Board of Directors of

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3563 of 2023(2) dt.15-05-2023 3/3

¶25

the Company, there is no allegation that they were incharge of or in ultimate control of the affairs of the Company, this Court, therefore, directs that in case of their arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from today, let the petitioners above-named be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 25,000/(twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Aurangabad (Town) P.S. Case No. 200 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶26

And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶27

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶28

Rajeev/-

¶29

U T

Priya Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Barun Jay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajeshwar Prasad and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mukesh Kumar Jha @ Mukesh Kumar Vs The Punjab National Bank

Sujeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ganesh Yadav @ Manjhala Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Aryan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar