Amirka Yadav @ Amika Yadav And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.48960 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2595 Year- 2013 Thana -EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- EASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Amirka Yadav @ Amika Yadav Son of Late Bengali Yadav,
2. Bhikhar Yadav, Son of Shiv Deni Yadav,
3. Buni Yadav, Son of Puran Yadav,
4. Meena Devi, Wife of Amirka Yadav @ Amika Yadav, All Residents of Village - Bishunpur, Matiyarwa, Police Station - Paharpur, District - East Champaran (Motihari).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Harendra Yadav, S/o Rangila Yadav, R/o Vill. - Bishanpur Motiyarwa, P.S. - Paharpur, District - East Champaran.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhurendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 02-11-2015 Heard counsel for the petitioners and APP for the State. The four petitioners herein are inter se related and seek anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 2595 of 2013 registered under sections 323, 420 and 467 IPC.
In short, the allegation is that petitioner no.1 got the land measuring 05 katha, 03 dhur sold by the mother-in-law of the complainant in his favour by presenting a lady who impersonated herself as the mother-in-law of the complainant. The petitioner no.3 is the witness to the said sale deed whereas petitioner no.4 is the wife of the purchaser. Such sale, according to the prosecution
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48960 of 2015 (2) dt.02-11-2015 2/2 case, was effected on 13.04.2002. Subsequently, the complainant claims to have got the sale deed registered in respect of the same in the name of his minor son on 16.08.2002. Both parties have made claim over the land on the basis of the sale deed which led to filing of the present case.
Considering the allegations and the relevant facts appearing from the records, in my view, it is a fit case where the petitioners should be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners above named, in the event of arrest/surrender within four weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction learned CJM, East Champaran at Motihari in Trial No. 8093 of 2014 arising out of Compalint Case No. 2595 of 2013 on condition that one of the bailors shall be their own/close family members. The petitioners shall appear in person on each date fixed at the trial. In case of default in doing so on two consecutive dates, the trial court shall cancel their bail bonds (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U T