Prabhat Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14823 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-808 Year-2022 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai ====================================================== Prabhat Kumar Son Of Late Harihar Singh Resident Of Village - Mahmadpur Gautam, P.S. - Nayagaon, District - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
Rajballabh Prasad Singh Son Of Late Krishnaballabh Prasad Singh Resident Of Village - Badalpura, P.S. - Matihani, District - Begusarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024 Heard Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 808 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 14.12.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. According to prosecution case, one Poonam Kumari fraudulently sold her land as well as land of the informant to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14823 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/3 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner has purchased the piece of land from Poonam Kumari and the informant has filed the present F.I.R against Poonam Kumari and the petitioner on the ground that Poonam Kumari is not the actual owner of the land in question and Poonam Kumari in connivance with the petitioner has sold the land in question. He further submits that the petitioner has no knowledge whether Poonam Kumari is the actual owner of the land and he has purchased the land from Poonam Kumari after paying all the consideration amount.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing 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, Begusarai in connection with Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 808 of 2022, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14823 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 3/3 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T