IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.46552 of 2009 KAYUM ANSARI, son of Sajjad Ansari Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3/ 06.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State as well as informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter relates to accounting, arising out of business transaction. Learned counsel referring to Annexure-2, submits that a sum of Rs. 5,40,000/- has already been paid on 15.06.2005. He further submits that there is no allegation that petitioner had intention to cheat from the very beginning. Learned counsel for the informant and State submit that on assurance of the petitioner, informant had supplied the clothes worth Rs. 28 lacs to the petitioner on his address and against the values of clothes worth Rs. 28 lacs, only a sum Rs. 5,50,000/- has been paid. Thus, they submit that on false assurance, petitioner has cheated the informant of a sum of Rs. 22,50,000/-. In view of the nature of allegations, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. His prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)