Heeralal Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17876 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2023 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran ====================================================== Heeralal Ram S/o- Late Bandhu Ram R/o Village- Sundarpatti PS-Nautan District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Nitin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-07-2025 Heard Mr.Nitin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No.269 of 2023, dated 05.07.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 467,468,471,327,384,420 and 34 of IPC. 3.According to prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he was witness of the sale deed in question which was executed by one Patiya Devi to one Rampreeet Ram. Petitioner is not named in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated. In fact the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17876 of 2025(4) dt.30-07-2025 2/3 of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the supervision note of the Dy.S.P. which suggests that the petitoner is one of the witnesses of the sale deed in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the petitioner is neither the beneficiary nor the executor of the sale deed in question rather he is only the witness of the sale deed in question.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one, as mentioned in para-3 of the supplementary affidavit.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner is not named in the FIR, he is only the witness of the sale deed in question and he is not the beneficiary of the aforesaid transaction, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No.269 of 2023, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17876 of 2025(4) dt.30-07-2025 3/3 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS,2023 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her 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/her 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) Nitesh/- U T