Shashikant Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24102 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2024 Thana- ARERAJ District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Shashikant Pandey son of Parikshit Pandey Resident of village - Lauriya, PsGovindganj, Dist- East Champaran 2.
Parikshit Pandey son of Late Pashpat Pandey Resident of village - Lauriya, Ps- Govindganj, Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Shakur Alam son of Late Rahman Miyan Resident of village - Jogiyar, PsOp Areraj (Govindganj), dist- East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhishek Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 61(2), 316, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.11.2023, informant purchased a piece of land from co-accused Himanshu Pandey, who is son and grandson of these petitioners respectively, and it is alleged that after purchasing the land informant came to know that title suit No. 961 of 2012 is going on over the purchased land and accused persons have concealed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24102 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 2/3 the said fact from the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Petitioner No. 1 is witness and petitioner No. 2 is identifier of the sale deed. Petitioners are neither vendors nor vendee of the land in question and they are not the beneficiaries of the alleged transaction. Moreover, dispute involved in this case is regarding sale and purchase of land which is purely of civil nature. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and the fact that petitioners are not the beneficiaries, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Areraj P. S. Case No. 108 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24102 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 3/3 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T