Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36955/2016rejected

Sanket Sharma @ Sanket Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-09-26Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36955 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1954 Year- 2015 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA ======================================================

1. Sanket Sharma @ Sanket Kumar Son of Madheshwar Sharma Resident of Village- Simra, P.S.- Janipur, District- Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rameshwar Sharma son of Late Tihadhari Singh village- Simra. P.S.- Janipur, District- Patna at Present village-Mohmad Pur P.S.- Phulwari Sharif, District- Patna .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Govind Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyavarat Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Complaint case No. 1954-C/ 2015 under Section 419, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant alleged that Lalita Devi @ Leelavati Devi @ Komal Devi, wife of the petitioner, impersonated herself to be Sheo Kumari Devi, widow of Rameshwar Sharma, the complainant.

It is submitted that petitioner is only identifier of the executant of the sale deed. The complainant has also filed a suit for declaring the sale deed as not binding on him but from the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36955 of 2016 (3) dt.26-09-2016 2/2 facts, it appears that Lalita Devi @ Leelavati Devi @ Komal Devi is the wife of petitioner and petitioner introduced Lalita Devi @ Leelavati Devi @ Komal Devi as widow of Rameshwar Sharma. The petitioner has equally played role in committing fraud by identifying his own wife as widow of Rameshwar Sharma, the complainant, and got the sale deed executed in favour of Nagendra Prasad Singh.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T