Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43257 of 2011 (3) dt.18-04-2012 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.43257 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Dayanidhi Singh @ D. N. Singh Late Satyadeo Singh Moh Saketnagar Ps Sasaram Rohtas At Sasaram .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Dilip Kumar Singh, s/o late Kulvansh Narain Singh, r/o Jamuhar, P.S. Dihari, district Rohtas, Bihar .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER 3 18-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the informant and the State. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail for offence under [STATUTE] . It is alleged that the petitioner, along with 4-5 unknown persons, arrived at the office of the informant and asked to return the cheque of Rs.1,20,00,000/- and the unknown persons taken Rs.2,48,000/- from the Manager. It is, further, alleged that the petitioner has snatched the golden chain of the informant and also took away Rs.65,000/- from the pocket and demanded to pay rupees one lakh per month as rangdari. However, it has come in the case diary that earlier cheque was given by this petitioner to the informant. The informant is the owner of Devi Construction and there was business transaction between the petitioner and the informant and the petitioner is the Managing Director of Civiteck Construction Pvt. Ltd. and the money was paid for the supply of the stone with regard to the construction of the road. However, the cheque was advanced and it is alleged that the occurrence took place. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Managing Director of the company having turn over of rupees twenty five crores annually and it is highly unexpected that he will come for committing dacoity and it is Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43257 of 2011 (3) dt.18-04-2012 2 submitted hat it is a case of business rivalry. The learned counsel for the informant, however, contended that witnesses have supported the prosecution case and the case has been found true by the investigating agency. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances that both the petitioner and the informant have business transaction amongst themselves of crores of rupees, in the event of arrest or surrender of the petitioner, he is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, within four weeks, from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S. Case No. 84 of 2011 to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the petitioner shall cooperate with the police during investigation and produce himself as and when required by the police during investigation. SA/- (Gopal Prasad, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 386

Statute Text:
Section 386 of the Indian Penal Code. extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt. Whoever commits extortion by putting any person in fear of death or of grievous hurt to that person or to any other, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.