Sarita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17230 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2019 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.

SARITA DEVI W/o Gyandeo Gupta Resident of Village-Khairma, P.SJamui, District-Jamui. 2.

Gyandeo Gupta @ Gyandeo Sah S/o Saryug Sah Resident of VillageKhairma, P.S-Jamui, District-Jamui. 3.

Renu Devi W/o Ranjeet Kumar Resident of Village-Khairma, P.S-Jamui, District-Jamui.

4.

Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Sah S/o Late Kishun Sah Resident of VillageKhairma, P.S-Jamui, District-Jamui. 5.

Sanakhat Rohan Sah @ Rohan Sah S/o Late Jago Sah Resident of VillageKhairma, P.S-Jamui, District-Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Daya Shankar Prasad Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 15-09-2020 The present petition has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Zainul Abedin, learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 295 of 2019 for the offence registered under Sections 467, 468, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17230 of 2020(2) dt.15-09-2020 2/3 The petitioners herein are alleged to have hatched a conspiracy and taking the advantage of the mental condition of the husband of the informant, had got a sale deed executed illegally depicting lower amount of sale consideration therein. The learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners are innocent, they have been falsely implicated in the present case and are having clean antecedent. It is further submitted that the dispute in question is purely a civil dispute and the remedy of the informant lies before an appropriate court of competent civil jurisdiction. Per contra, the learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and taking into account the fact that the dispute in question is in the nature of a civil dispute, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioners to the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17230 of 2020(2) dt.15-09-2020 3/3 Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 295 of 2019 subject to the conditions as stipulated under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U T