Bhaweshanand Roy v. The State Of Bihar
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52141 of 2014 (3) dt.03-03-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.52141 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -870 Year- 2014 Thana -KHAZANIHAT District- PURNIA ======================================================
1. Bhaweshanand Roy son of Sri Sachidanand Roy Resident of Village - Kala Bhawan Road, P.S. - K.Hat, District - Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 03-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.
Petitioner seeks bail in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No. 870 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegedly, the petitioner executed a plain agreement to sale the land and took rupees five lacs in the year 2010 on the basis of power of attorney but he neither returned the money nor he was able to transfer the said land.
Submission is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He is suffering in custody since 10.11.2014. The dispute appears to be purely of civil nature and as such the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.52141 of 2014 (3) dt.03-03-2015 petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration as in this case chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with prosecution evidence.
In the facts and circumstances stated above and considering the period of detention, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No. 870 of 2014, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T