Surendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6345 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-349 Year-2022 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Surendra Ram Son of Indra Ram Resident of Dighi Kala PS- Hajipur Town District- Vaishali 2.

Dhanesh Prasad son of Ram Nagina Prasad village- Dumari, ps- Manjhi, Dist- Saran At Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yashraj Bardhan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Dighwara P.S. Case No. 349 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioners along with other co-accused persons are said to have cheated the informant by preparing fake and fraudulent settlement paper in their favour of land in question which is owned and possessed by the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6345 of 2025(2) dt.14-02-2025 2/2 the petitioner no.1 is Circle Officer and petitioner no. 2 is a Karamchari. He further submits that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail and submits that specific overt act has been attributed against the petitioners.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

7. However, if the petitioners surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order, considering the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T