Md. Halim @ Md. Halim Mian v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10480 of 2020 Arising Out of Case No.-559 Year-2015 GAYA COMPLAINT CASE District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
MD. HALIM @ MD. HALIM MIAN Son of hameed Mian @ Poli Mian Resident of Village - Belhariya, Badhee Bigha, P.S.- Tekari, Distt.- Gaya. 2.
Md. Akbar Mian Son of Md. Halim @ Md. Halim mian Resident of Village - Belhariya, Badhee Bigha, P.S.- Tekari, Distt.- Gaya. 3.
Raju Alam Son of Late Munna Alam Resident of Village - Belhariya, Badhee Bigha, P.S.- Tekari, Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Manish Kumar No2 For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 467, 468, 471 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner No.1 sold the property of complainant which was gifted to him by his grand father. Petitioners No.2 & 3 are witnesses of the sale deed.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10480 of 2020(4) dt.27-07-2023 2/2 No.1 is uncle of the complainant and petitioners No.2 & 3 are his co-villagers. The land in question belongs to joint family property and petitioner No.1 is alleged to have sold only a small part of the land which was in his share. The dispute is of civil nature and the present case has been lodged only to pressurize the petitioner No.1 to fulfill the unreasonable demand of the complainant. Petitioners have got clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts of the case and nature of accusation against the petitioners, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest/ surrender within a period of six weeks from today shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Gaya in connection with Complaint case No. 559/ 2015, subject to conditions laid down u/s 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T