Allowed

Sanjeev Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC28 Jul 2023CR. MISC./37583/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition, the Patna High Court granted relief to a branch manager accused under various IPC sections for alleged investment fraud, relying on parity with prior bail decisions for co-accused.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is allowed to move an application for bail before the court below if arrested or surrenders within four weeks, by furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of similar amount

Sanjeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37583 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-505 Year-2021 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna

¶3

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

¶4

SANJEEV KUMAR, S/O KAUSHAL KISHORE SINGH, R/O MohallaChondi Behind Barh, P.S- Barh, Distt.- Patna.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Sanjay Prasad, S/O Late Nand Kishore Prasad, R/O Pipal tal pakka Kuan ward no.20 Barj Bazar. P.S- Barh, Distt.- Patna.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr.Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 28-07-2023

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶17

learned APP for the State of Bihar.

¶18

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.505(C) of 2021 registered for offence under Sections 323, 341, 406, 420, 504, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The petitioner being a Branch manager of an investment and finance company namely Sahara India has been made accused. It is alleged that the petitioner had sold different schemes of Sahara India to the tune of Rs.6,89,950 (Six lakhs eighty nine thousand nine hundred and fifty rupees) to the informant and the maturity amount has not been paid.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37583 of 2023(2) dt.28-07-2023 2/3

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent. He has been made an accused merely because he is an employee of the company. It is not the informant’s case that the money was not deposited by the petitioner in the company. The fact that no return has come on the investment is nothing more than result of a market risk. Under similar circumstances, the petitioner was earlier implicated in another complaint case by an investor bearing Complaint Case No.433(C) of 2021. Co-accused persons namely Bikky Kumar and Satyendra Kumar have been allowed anticipatory bail by coordinate benches of this court in Cr. Misc. Nos. 71725 of 2022 and 70474 of 2022 , respectively.

¶22

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer

¶23

for bail.

¶24

Considering the rival submissions, nature of allegations and claim based on parity, this Court is inclined to allow petitioner’s prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶25

Petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. 8. Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, in the

¶26

event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37583 of 2023(2) dt.28-07-2023 3/3

¶28

sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. Ist Class, Barh, District- Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No.505(C) of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as also subject to the following conditions:

¶29

(i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.

¶30

(ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled.

¶31

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

¶32

shashank/-

¶33

U T

Sanjeev Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev Kumar 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

Awadhesh Kumar Ram, Vs The State of Bihar

Indrajeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Surya Deo Sharma Vs The Food Corporation of India

Hashim Ansari @ Md. Hashim Ansari Vs the State of Bihar

Brajesh Kumar @ Brajesh Mahto @ Brijesh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Sushila Kumari Vs the State of Bihar