Anil Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.16420 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -156 Year- 2014 Thana -KESARIA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================
1. Anil Singh, S/o Late Ram Nath Singh,
2. Ram Barai Thakuir S/o Langtu Thakur , Both are R/o Village- Siswa Patna, P.S.- Keseriya , District- East Champaran.
3. Krishna Murati Singh S/o Shiv Mangal Singh,
4. Shiv Mangal Singh S/o Late Nageshwar Singh, Both are R/o VillageSiswa Kharar , P.S.- Kalyan Pur District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Veena Kumari Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 06-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 156 of 2014 for the office registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly, the petitioners are conducting their fisheries on the basis of lease deed which is alleged by the informant to be a forged and fabricated document. Learned counsel for the petitioners, thus, submits that, if at all, the informant was having any right over the land which she claims to be Khatiyani, then the appropriate remedy available before her is to move before the Court of competent jurisdiction to have the
same lease deed cancelled but instead of doing so she has filed the present case making false and frivolous allegations. It is further submitted that in view of the admitted position that the petitioners are conducting their entire operations on the basis of the lease deed, no case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out.
He thus, submits that in such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to privilege of prearrest bail Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State, it appears that there is bona fide land dispute between the parties and the same will be settled in an appropriate proceedings, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of J.M. 1st Class, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 156 of 2014, subject to the condition as laid under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(1) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, preferably, father, mother, brother, sister and/or his wife.
(2) The petitioner shall not indulge
himself in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.
(3) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of his failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.
(4) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U T