Dinesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6052 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2023 Thana- KARAKAT District- Rohtas ====================================================== Dinesh Singh S/O LATE RAJENDRA SINGH @ LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH VILLAGE- BUDHI JETHWAR PS. TARARI DIST. BHOJPUR AT ARA.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-02-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Karakat P.S. Case No. 169 of 2023 for the offence under sections 341, 448, 427, 504, 406, 307, 379, 506, 34 of the I.P.C. and 27 of Arms Act lodged on 09.08.2023 by the informant, Kiran Devi.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that her husband and elder brother were having 'Manoj Misthan Bhandar' since last quarter century. Subsequently, the landlord offered to sell the same for consideration amount and accordingly, they paid around nineteen lakhs. However, the sale deed was never executed and in the meantime, the land was transferred to his daughter, Radhika Devi. Further, the allegation

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6052 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/2 is that the accused persons thereafter stormed the shop and assaulted her husband. There is also allegation of snatching of the amount whereafter her husband was taken B.H.U, Varanasi for treatment. Accordingly, the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no evidence of transfer of Rs. 19,00000/- and/or document to support the allegation.

5. Learned APP, on the other hand, submits that it is not for the Court concerned to go into the evidence and as per the allegation, Rs. 19,00000/- have been taken with the intention of cheat as despite taking such larger amount, the land was instead transferred in favour of his daughter, Radhika Devi.

6. In that background, no case of anticipatory bail is made out, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) kiran/- U T