Raj Kishore Rai And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46184 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -534 Year- 2013 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Raj Kishore Rai S/o Ram Swarup Rai resident of Village - Muksudpur, P.S. Minapur, District - Muzaffarpur.

2. Ashok Mishra S/o Hari Nandan Mishra, resident of Mohalla - Kedarnath Road, P.S. - Town, District - Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sunaina Devi W/o Late Batohi Mishra, resident of Village - Muksudpur, P.S. Minapur, District - Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.534 of 2013, Trial No.4155/14/3797/15 for the offences instituted under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant accused not both have partitioned of parental properties at Lok Adalat in prelitigation case no.402 of 2012 and this case was disposed off on 11.1.2013 bearing khata no.301 and khesra no.2137 of area 1 Acre 15 dec. the complainant has go this area. It is further alleged that on 30.1.2013 the accused no.1 has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46184 of 2015 (3) dt.01-02-2016 2/2 registered the said land to the accused no.2 with doing forged and other accused persons are witnessed also identified. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. As per the prosecution case, one of the petitioners is said to have identified on the sale deed and other accused persons are witnessed to the sale deed. The matter relates to a civil dispute. The other coaccused, who is said to have purchased the land in question, has already been granted anticipatory bail vide Cr. Misc. No.1935 of 2016.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint petition. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Smt. Anupam Kumari, J.M. 1st Class, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Complaint Case No.534/13, Tr. No.4155/14/3797/15, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) N.H./- U T