Tinku Kumar Das v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10928 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1063 Year-2022 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.
Tinku Kumar Das Son of Late Shivanand Das Resident of Village - Dhangama, Police Station - Ranipatra, District - Purnea. 2.
Sanju Devi Wife of Tinku Kumar Das Resident of Village - Dhangama, Police Station - Ranipatra, District - Purnea. 3.
Aruna Devi Wife of Balram Sharma Resident of Kursanda, P.S.- Pranpur, District - Purnea.
4.
Balram Sharma Son of Late Tarun Sharma Resident of Kursanda, P.S.- Pranpur, District - Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jagdhar Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Prosecution case in brief is that father of complainant purchased the land as prescribed in the complaint petition in the name of his wife Usha Devi. A panchayati was convened with regard to division of the said landed property between the complainant and his two sisters namely, Aruna Devi and Sanju Devi in which both the sisters received Rs. 2,00,000/- each from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10928 of 2023(2) dt.27-04-2023 2/2 the complainant and assured that they would not make any claim on the land in future, for which an agreement was also prepared between the parties. It is alleged that on 30.04.2022 both the sister petitioner nos. 2 and 3 with a conspiracy sold 0.35 decimals of land in the name of their husbands and tried to take possession over the same.
It is submitted that due to property dispute between the parties, petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Informant is non else than own brother of petitioner nos. 2 and
3. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that it is a case of civil dispute, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in connection with Complaint Case No. 1063 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T