IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr. Misc. No.19661 of 2010
SANTOSH RAUT, S/O CHARITAR RAM, R/O VILLAGE JAINAGAR,
P.S. JAINAGAR, DIST. MADHUBANI .. PETITIONER
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR .. OPPOSITE PARTY
****
/3/ 30.06.2010 Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
2. This application is for anticipatory bail for
offence under Sections 410, 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. There is allegation that Rs.45,000/- was
received by the petitioner on the pretext for providing
service and appointment letter was issued and got the
informant engaged in pretext of training for two months and
then gave a cheque amounting to Rs.4840/-was given by
accused no. 1, Amit Kumar, which bounced. The learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that he is in service under
accused no. 1, Amit Kumar, however, there is allegation that
money Rs.45,000/- was paid to accused no. 2 and this
petitioner has counted and gave it to Amit Kumar and all
three accused persons insisted to ensure service.
4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
2
petitioner. The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
5. However, if the petitioner surrenders and prays
for regular bail, that will be considered on it’s own merit
without being prejudiced of this order.
( Gopal Prasad, J. )
S.A.