Aadarsh Kumar @ Aadarsh Bharti v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The application stands allowed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 353, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. The application stands allowed. atul/- U T (Chandra Prakash Singh, J)
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH Mr.Pranay Sinha Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman ORAL ORDER 2 31-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bahardurpur P.S. Case No. 93/2023 dated
18.03.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 353 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the prosecution case, the informant (Branch Manager of Canara Bank) found the address of the co-accused Santosh Kumar similar to the address of Suram Hela. When the co-accused Santosh Kumar was asked, he disclosed that his friend Kanhaiya used address and Aadhar card for opening an account by getting it changed from CSC owner Aadarsh Kumar Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85860 of 2023(2) dt.31-01-2024 (the petitioner). The petitioner changed address in the Aadhar card hand to hand because of Kanhaiya has given the Pan Card hand to hand. There were 8-10 persons in the gang of Kanhaiya who provided wrong address, Aadhar card and on the basis of which accounts were opened and then illegal transaction was being done. The persons who open the account get Rs. 2,000/- per transactions. Further, Bahadurpur Police Station was informed and Santosh Kumar, his two mobiles, Aadhar card and pan card were handed over.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner was disclosed on the basis of statement of the co-accused, Santosh Kumar. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85860 of 2023(2) dt.31-01-2024 enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Patna City, Patna in connection with Bahardurpur P.S. Case No. 93/2023 subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Operative part
The application stands allowed. atul/- U T (Chandra Prakash Singh, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The application stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 353, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.