Sanjeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6179 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2018 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== SANJEEV KUMAR Son of Bhola Mahto Resident of Village- Maheshpur, Lakshisarai, Piribazar, P.S.- Piri Bazar, District- Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shyam Narain Singh S/o Late Singheshwar Singh R/o Vatta Rampur, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Saket Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajiv Nayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleges that when he had gone to get his Jamabandi receipt in the Circle Office, it transpired that the Jamabandi which was running in the name of his father had been changed though neither his father nor any member of his family had sold the land in question and the Jamabandi had been opened in the name of Satyendra Singh

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6179 of 2020(3) dt.12-09-2022 2/3 and Mukesh Singh. It is further alleged that even the area of the land had been reduced. Similar allegations have been made with respect to other plots. It is further alleged that when the complainant went to complain before the Circle Officer, he was pushed and misbehaved.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, he is a Circle Inspector, it is further submitted that the irregularities were discovered on 14.06.2017, but surprisingly the complaint came to be instituted after delay of more than one year on 20.07.2018. Learned counsel submits that similarly situated co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 17.02.2020 in Cr. Misc. No. 81095 of 2019, thus it is submitted that considering the said order, the petitioner was granted provisional anticipatory bail vide order dated 03.03.2020.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the provisional anticipatory bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6179 of 2020(3) dt.12-09-2022 3/3 granted to the petitioner is hereby confirmed on the similar terms and conditions.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T