Babita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21503 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-567 Year-2019 Thana- GAYA KOTWALI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Babita Devi Wife of Sanjay Kumar Resident of B.H. Jha Road Murarpur, Tekari Road Dhami Tola, PS- Kotwali District -Gaya 2.

Sanjay Kumar son of Late Sadhu Sharan Gupta Resident of B.H. Jha Road Murarpur PS- Kotwali District -Gaya 3.

Aditya Raj @ Anish Kumar son of Sanjay Kumar Resident of B.H. Jha Road Murarpur PS- Kotwali District -Gaya 4.

Aryan Raj @ Anurag Kumar Son of Sanjay Kumar Resident of B.H. Jha Road Murarpur PS- Kotwali District -Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Radhe Shyam Prasad S/O-Late Jagar nath prasad, R/O-Vill-Near K.P. More Bazaza road, P.S.-Kotwali, Dist-Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yogesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 03-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. From the office-notes dated 12.06.2025, it appears that the O.P. No.2 has died.

3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 567 of 2019 registered under Sections 341, 323, 420, 467, 468, 471, 379, 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. According to allegation, the petitioners are tenant of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21503 of 2025(5) dt.03-12-2025 2/3 the complainant. The complainant is an illiterate person having no issue. According to the averments of the complaint petition, the petitioners obtained the signatures and thumb impressions of the complainant at the pretext of issuing duplicate Aadhar card which was lost from the possession of the complainant. When the complainant requested the petitioners to vacate the premises for renovation works, they flatly refused and the papers signed/thumb impressioned by the complainant was alleged by the petitioners that adoption deed was fabricated in favour of the petitioners. It is further alleged that the petitioners insulted and snatched money from the complainant.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioners are tenants of the complainant. There was some dispute regarding tenancy and that is why they have falsely been implicated in the present case.

6. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21503 of 2025(5) dt.03-12-2025 3/3 bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 567 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) rishi/- U T