Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.6013 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Vikram Kumar S/O Prahlad Prasad Resident Of Village- Daudnagar, P.S.- Daudnagar, Distt.- Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 08-02-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with a case in which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] . The case arises out of a complaint. It is contended that the petitioner Vikram Kumar, his brother Mahesh Kumar and his father Prahlad Prasad have falsely been implicated in the present case. Save and except ocular allegation, there is no documentary evidence in order to substantiate the allegation. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. It is further contended that co- accused Prahlad Prasad and Mahesh Kumar having identical allegation have already been granted anticipatory bail by order dated 18.10.2011 passed in Cr.Misc. No.26432 of 2011 by another Bench of this court. considering the facts and circumstances of the case let the petitioner named above, in the event of arrest or surrender, be released Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6013 of 2012 (2) dt.08-02-2012 2 / 2 2 on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S.C. Srivastava learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Complaint Case No. 1448 of 2010 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also subject to the condition that (i) both the bailors will be close relative of the petitioner who will give separate affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority, (iii) that he shall remain present before the court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If he wants to remain absent, then he shall take prior permission of the court and in case of compelling and unavoidable circumstance for remaining absent, he shall immediately inform the court and request that he may be permitted to be present through the counsel and (iv) that liberty is given to the complainant/State to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioner violates any of the conditions imposed by this court. Md.S./- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 420

Statute Text:
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Cheating and there by dishonestly inducing delivery of property, or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.