Shahnaz Begum v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 18620 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2020 Thana- Jalalgarh District-Purnia ==========================================================================
1. Shahnaz Begum, Wife of Sohrab Ansari
2. Sohrab Ansari, Son of Late Giyasuddin Ansari
3. Muslim Ansari, Son of Late Giyasuddin Ansari, All are resident of Village- Pipar Pathi, Post Office - Aakanba, P.S.- Jalalgarh, DisttPurnea. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ========================================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Helal Ahmad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, APP =========================================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-07-2020 Heard Mr. Md. Helal Ahmad, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, learned APP for the State.
The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 03 of 2020 dated 02.01.2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 120 (B), 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the sale took place on 01.07.2017, but a complaint case regarding the same was lodged on 06.11.2019. The aforesaid complaint was sent under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for institution of a regular case whereafter the subject FIR has been lodged.
It is alleged in the FIR that the petitioners got the sale deed executed by the husband of the complainant/informant who is a handicapped person and who cannot speak.
The petitioners deny the aforesaid allegation and submit that the vendor of the property viz. Md. Mujib Ansari @ Mujibur Rahman is a person of sound mind and the present case has been lodged only for putting pressure upon the petitioners to part with more money with respect to the said land.
Apart from this, it has been submitted that Md. Mujib Ansari had sold the property in favour of petitioners no. 1 and 3, whereas petitioner no. 2 is a witness of the sale deed. The consideration money which is stated in the sale deed has been paid at the time of execution of the sale deed. It has been submitted thus, that it is a case of civil dispute.
Considering the aforestated facts, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest/surrender before
the court below within a period of six weeks, on their furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in connection with Jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 03 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T