AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dhrub Narayan Upadhyay, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is accused in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No. 166 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 527 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla.
It reveals from the complaint that the petitioner has purchased a motorcycle from the shop of complainant but he did not make payment, though he assured to do it.
It is submitted that it was accused No. 2 who had given assurance on behalf of petitioner to make payment to the complainant against purchase of said motorcycle and he had also issued cheque for that. It is further pointed out that the petitioner has paid cost of the motorcycle to accused No. 2 and therefore, he cannot be compelled to make payment against said motorcycle twice.
Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
If the petitioner has been made fool by his friend, the complainant should not suffer. Be that as it may, it is not disputed that the petitioner has purchased a motorcycle from the shop of complainant and no payment against said motorcycle was made. In the aforesaid circumstances, I do not feel inclined to consider the prayer of petitioner made u/S. 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail made on behalf of above named petitioner stands dismissed.