Ishra Nand Ray @ Isharanand Ram And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.2003 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-335 Year-2016 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ======================================================

1. Ishra Nand Ray @ Isharanand Ram, Son of Late Ram Naresh Ray, Resident of Village- Purbi Suarmarwa, P.S. Maner, District- Patna.

2. Ram Babu Singh, Son of Late Raj Balabh Ray, Resident of Village- Rambad, P.S. Maner, District- Patna.

3. Pawan Kumar Singh, Son of Kailash Pati Singh, Resident of Village- Purbi Suarmarwa, P.S. Maner, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Roy, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Sri Damodar Prasad Tiwary, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-01-2018 Heard learned Counsels for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case got initiated with the filing of Complaint Case No. 650 C of 2016, by one Ravindra Rai, dated 27.06.2016, which came to be registered as Danapur P.S. Case

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2003 of 2018(2) dt.16-01-2018 2/3 No. 335 of 2016 on 12.08.2016 after being transferred under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned Court below.

The prosecution case is that the grand-father of the informant, Lallu Rai, executed one Katha eighteen and half dhur of land in favour of the accused Ramugrah Rai in 1950, Ramugrah Rai fraudulently executed three katha ten dhur of land in favour of petitioner no.1, Ishranand Rai and Rajni Kant Rai, whereas, petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are witness to the sale deed.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the thrust of accusation is against Ramugrah Ray, when petitioner no.1, Ishra Nand Ray is the bona fide purchaser and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are simply witnesses to the sale deed. It is submitted by learned APP for the State that the petitioner no.1 is the purchaser and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are witness to the sale deed.

Considering the thrust of accusation against Ramugrah Ray, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.2003 of 2018(2) dt.16-01-2018 3/3 of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Danapur in connection with Complaint Case No. 650C of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Ashwini/- U T