(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel appearing for the informant.
(2.) The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Godda (Town) P.S. Case No.232 of 2021, for the offence registered under Sec. 420, 406 and 506 of the IPC, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda.
(3.) Mr. Vinay Kumar Tiwary, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has earlier lodged the Godda (Town) P.S. Case No.231 of 2021 against the informant and her husband which was investigated by the police and final form has been submitted and they have not been sent up for trial and on the protest petition of the informant the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance in the matter against the informant and her husband. He submits that as a counter blast case, the present case has been lodged later on and it has been registered on 12/7/2021. He submits that the allegations are falsely made of misappropriation of the funds of the firm namely M/s Kaushalya Motors which deals in dealer of Royal Enfield. He submits that the petitioner was working in Ghana (West Africa) and he has returned back from there and with consent of the informant as well as husband of the informant they have started partnership business with regard to the said firm namely M/s Kaushalya Motors in which he has invested a sum of Rs.61.00 lacs and odd and certain amount was also taken by way of loan for running of the said business. He draws the attention of the Court to the supplementary affidavit and submits that the documents with regard to financial years of the said firm is there and by way of referring to financial years, he submits that the turn-over of the firm is shown there. He submits that the entire allegation is false and if any case is made out that is of civil in nature. He denies the appointment of the petitioner as Manager of the said firm and he is one of the partners in the said firm and the petitioner and informant are cousin brothers amongst themselves and the informant is sister-in-law of the petitioner. He draws the attention of the Court to page no.138 and 139 of the supplementary affidavit and submits that even the amount received by the informant and her husband are also shown therein. On these grounds, he submits that privilege of anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner.