Rampyari Devi @ Ram Peyaree Dev v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16020 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1277 Year-2022 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE District- Rohtas ====================================================== Rampyari Devi @ Ram Peyaree Dev Wife Of Late Kamlesh Singh @ Late Bhola Singh Resident Of Village - Mor Sarai, P.S. - Shivsagar, District - Kaimur At Bhabua At Present Resident Of Village - Dulahi, P.S. - Chand, District - Kaimur At Bhabua ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Sanjay Kumar Singh Son Of Late Rup Narayan Nsingh Resident Of Village - Ruppur, P.O. - Rophatha, P.S. - Nokha, District - Rohtas At Sasaram, At Present Reside At Mohalla New Area, P.S. - Sasaram (N), District - Rohtas At Sasaram Mo. 9939708778 ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, Addl Public Prosecutor Mrs. Meena Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the opposite party no.2.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 420, 323, 341,/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, despite taking consideration money petitioner refused to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the instant complainant has been lodged on forged documents. Dispute is predominantly of civil nature At best, it is a case of breach of agreement which cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating, unless fraudulent and dishonest intention is shown at the beginning of the transaction. Petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16020 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2 claims clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for bail of all the petitioners is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks from today, let these petitioners, mentioned above, 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Rohtas at Sasaram in Complaint Case No. 1277 of 2022, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T