Ranjeet Jha @ Ranjeet Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8809 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-564 Year-2019 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.
RANJEET JHA @ RANJEET KUMAR JHA Son of Harischandra Jha Resident of Village - Malhad, P.S.- Supaul , Dist.- Supaul. Presently residing at Vill- Vidyapuri, Ward No.09, P.S.- Supaul, Dist.- Supaul. 2.
Harishankar Jha Son of Harischandra Jha Resident of Village - Malhad, P.S.- Supaul , Dist.- Supaul. Presently residing at Vill- Vidyapuri, Ward No.09, P.S.- Supaul, Dist.- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Tej Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 29-02-2020 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Supaul case no. 564 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 406, 420, 504, 506/34 of Indian Penal Code.
The allegation is regarding the informant having entered into an agreement to sell with the accused persons for purchase of a plot of land and it is alleged that a sum of Rs. 2,26,000/- was given to the accused persons as advance, out of which a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was given to the co-accused person namely Ranju Jha, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was given to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8809 of 2020(2) dt.29-02-2020 2/3 the co-accused person namely Harishankar Jha and a sum of Rs. 1,26,000/- was given to the petitioner, however, it is alleged that the petitioner did not facilitate registration of sale deed as also did not refund the money.
The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that neither there is any agreement to sell nor there is any proof of handing over a sum of Rs. 1,26,000/- to the petitioner herein. Moreover, the dispute in question is purely a dispute of civil nature pertaining to non execution of sale deed with regard to certain land alleged to have been sold. It is further submitted that the petitioners are having clean antecedent and similarly situated co-accused person namely Ranju Jha has already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.12.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. no. 81075 of 2019.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as also taking into account the parity of the case of the petitioners with that of the co-accused person namely Ranju Jha, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioners to the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8809 of 2020(2) dt.29-02-2020 3/3 Accordingly, the abovenamed petitioners, in the event of their 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, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Supaul in connection with Supaul PS case no. 564 of 2019 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T