Gautam Kumar Sinha @ Goutam Kumar Sinha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14806 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1172 Year-2007 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== GAUTAM KUMAR SINHA @ GOUTAM KUMAR SINHA SON OF LATE VIJAY KUMAR SINGH R/O MOHALLA GEWAL BIGHA (SAHMIR TAKYA) P.S.- RAMPUR, DISTRICT- GAYA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

ANUP KUMAR SON OF SRI BASUDEO PRASAD R/O MOHALLASAHMIR TAKYA LANE, P.S.- CIVIL LINES, DISTRICT- GAYA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 24-05-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint case no. 1172 of 2007, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation, according to the complainant, is that a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was paid, by way of advance, by the complainant to the son of the co-accused namely Munni Devi for the purposes of purchase of the land belonging to the said Munni Devi. Subsequently, even after receiving the entire sale

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14806 of 2023(2) dt.24-05-2023 2/3 consideration, the petitioner and the said Munni Devi did not execute a sale deed.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner is said to be an accused in one another case but he is on bail in the said case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted by referring to the statement made by the complainant on solemn affirmation that the complainant has already filed a civil suit, hence, it is apparent that the allegations levelled in the present case are purely in the nature of civil dispute. It is also submitted that no agreement of sale has been brought on record to show that any transaction had taken place in between the petitioner/ his mother and the complainant.

Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the materials available on record, this Court is prima facie of the view that firstly, no agreement to sale has been brought on record to suggest that any transaction of sale/ purchase had taken place in between the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14806 of 2023(2) dt.24-05-2023 3/3 parties and secondly, the allegations levelled in the complaint petition are purely in the nature of civil dispute, thus I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioner to the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the abovenamed petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Complaint case no. 1172 of 2007, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T