Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.17498 of 2012 ====================================================== Rajendra Kumar @ Rajendra Rai, Son of Late Singashan Rai, resident of village-Basra Nonadih, P.S.-Sikarhatta, District-Bhojpur at Ara. .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 26-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The case was initially filed as a complaint which was referred to police, pursuant to which, a case under [STATUTE] has been registered. It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that the informant himself had issued about 100 receipts after receiving Rs. 250/- each from the members. There is no outstanding against the petitioner as would appear from the paragraphs referred to in the order passed by the court below while rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner. The court below referring to paragraph 76, 78, and 81 of the case diary recorded that the amount collected by the petitioner was deposited in the name of Kamlesh Narain, Chairman, Bihar State Rural Co-operative Housing Federation Ltd., Bihar, Patna. Be that as it may, considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17498 of 2012 (2) dt.26-04-2012 2 / 2 2 bail on his executing a bond with two solvent sureties, each in a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Sikarhatta P.S. Case No. 59 of 2011 on the following conditions: (i) That 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 circumstances for remaining absent, he will immediately inform the court and request that he may be permitted to be present through the counsel. (iv) That liberty is given to the State to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioner violate any of the conditions imposed by this Court. Sanjeet/- (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.