IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3911 of 2019

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2019 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran

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

1.

MANI BHUSHAN KUMAR @ MANI BHUSHAN SAH Son of Darpan

Sah Resident of Village - Chhapra Bahas, P.S.- Sugali, Distt - East

Champaran.

2.

Darpan Sah Son of Late Indrajit Sah Resident of Village - Chhapra Bahas,

P.S.- Sugali, Distt - East Champaran.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

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

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s

:

Mr.Dhurendra Kumar

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr.Usha Kumari 1

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA

ORAL ORDER

3

06-01-2020

Heard the parties.

By way of this memo of appeal, preferred under

Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, appellant seeks for setting

aside the order dated 11.7.2019 passed in Sugauli P.S.Case

No.29 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Section 323,

420, 467, 406, 468, 371 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal

Code and Section 3(i) 7(5) of SC/ST Act by the learned Ist

Addl. Sessions Judge cum Special Judge SC/ST Act, East

Champaran at Motihari whereby and where-under, the

appellant’s application for grant of anticipatory bail has been

rejected.

As per FIR, the informant got Rs.20 lac as

compensation in the land acquisition case. It is said that the

appellants have got transferred Rs.02 lac in his account by

committing fraud from the account of informant.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3911 of 2019(3) dt.06-01-2020

2/2

Submission of the learned counsel for the

appellants is that as a matter of fact the appellant had given

Rs.02 lac to the informant for construction of his house and that

has been transferred to his account and he has been falsely

implicated in this case.

Heard learned Special P.P. also, who has opposed

the prayer for bail stating that the appellants by playing fraud

has got transferred the amount from the account of the

informant, which he had got in the land acquisition case. There

is also allegation of abuse and other allegation also, as such they

do not deserve anticipatory bail.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and

circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant privilege of

anticipatory bail to the appellants and they have to surrender and

pray for regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit

without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

With the above direction, this appeal is dismissed.

chn/-

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)

U

T