Ajay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 25-06-2025

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶13

APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶14

A copy of the agreement has been been provided by learned counsel for the petitioner be kept on record.

¶15

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Amas P.S. Case No. 323/2024 for the offence under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of the B.N.S. lodged on 29.04.202 by the informant, Braj Mohan Prasad.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, for a piece of land, the petitioner took Rs. 1,50,000,00/- from Mr. Ram Naresh Singh who signed the document on behalf of L.K. Multi Trade Marketing Pvt. Limited, being its Director, as the petitioner

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38358 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 2/4

¶18

failed to subsequently transfer the land to Late Ram Naresh Singh who subsequently died. The informant claims to be one of the Director and even after issuance of legal notice, since the petitioner chose to look other way, the F.I.R.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wanted to transfer the land, could not materialize, in the meantime, Ram Naresh Singh died, he is ready to return Rs. 1,50,000,00/- with interest to L.K. Multi Trade Marketing Pvt. Limited in the bank account.

¶20

Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner had an eye on the amount and never wanted to alienate the land which resulted into sickness of Ram Naresh Singh who ultimately died and now the Director has come forward and lodge the F.I.R.

¶21

Though allegation is there, F.I.R. lodged, petitioner has to face the trial, on his undertaking as directed by learned counsel, is ready to return the amount along with statutory interest to the concerned Company and has no criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of Rs. 1,50,000,00/-.

¶22

It is made clear that the demand draft in favour of

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38358 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 3/4

¶24

the Company L.K. Multi Trade Marketing Pvt. Limited shall be presented at the time of execution of bail bond by the petitioner.

¶25

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.- 1^st Class, Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Amas P.S. Case No. 323 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., as also with the following conditions:-

¶26

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member /relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶27

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶28

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶29

(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any

¶30

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38358 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 4/4

¶31

criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty

¶32

to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.

¶33

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶34

Ranjeet/-