Jagdish Pd. Singh @ Jagdish Prasad Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18050 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2316 Year-2017 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Jagdish Pd. Singh @ Jagdish Prasad Singh, Son of Nami Lal Singh, Resident of Village - Bari Yusufpur, P.S.- Industrial Area, District - Vaishali. 2.

Pankaj Kumar, Son of Jagdish Pd Singh @ Jagdish Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Bari Yusufpur, P.S.- Industrial Area, District - Vaishali. 3.

Pawan Kumar, Son of Jagdish Pd Singh @ Jagdish Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Bari Yusufpur, P.S.- Industrial Area, District - Vaishali. 4.

Samrat Kumar, Son of Jagdish Pd Singh @ Jagdish Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Bari Yusufpur, P.S.- Industrial Area, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rajeev Kumar Singh, Son of Shri Shiv Dular Singh, Resident of Village - Hasanpur Bujurg, P.S.- Jandaha, District - Vaishali. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Diwakar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-06-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.2316 of 2017, disclosing offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation as per complaint petition against the petitioner is that petitioner is the father-in-law of the complainant, got the sale deed executed with respect to the village land of the complainant with condition that he will execute the sale deed with respect to the land at Hajipur, but later on, he refused and not returning the said land and got

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18050 of 2019(4) dt.28-06-2019 2/3 registered a false case under Section 498A of IPC against the complainant by his wife.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is the old age person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and as a matter of fact, daughter of petitioner is married to the complainant and she was subjected to cruelty and furthermore, the petitioner got the complainant treated at Bombay and spent huge amount and in view of that, the father of the complainant assured that he will return the same by the land in the share of the complainant but now the present case has been filed.

Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also, who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that petitioner is still ready to keep his wife and also ready to resolve this issue, if the land, for which, the sale deed has been executed in favour of the petitioner shall be returned to him.

Having heard both sides, in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, it appears that the present case is in the nature of family dispute as well as civil dispute, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks, be released on bail on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18050 of 2019(4) dt.28-06-2019 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Complaint Case No.2316 of 2017, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition that he is to co-operate in the trial and shall appear as and when required by the learned trial court, otherwise the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T