Sachchidanand Jha @ Thakkan Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28893 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-845 Year-2022 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Supaul ====================================================== Sachchidanand Jha @ Thakkan Jha Son of Late Jagtanand Jha RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -JAGATPUR, PS -SUPAUL, DISTRICT -SUPAUL ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Shyamnand Jha son of Late Parmanand Jha RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -JAGATPUR, PS -SUPAUL, DISTRICT -SUPAUL ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Anil Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Complainant :
Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 845 of 2022, Complaint dated 09.12.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 467, 468, 471, 384, 120(B) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 and 26 of the Arms Act but the cognizance has been taken under Sections 467, 471, 506, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. According to prosecution case, the complainant
2/4 alleging that he is rightful owner of land under Thana no. 203, Account No. 4031 (Area: 2 kattha 15 dhur). The petitioner and other co-accused persons started claiming ownership of this land based on an allegedly fake, unregistered deed dated 05.01.1950. On 15.09.2022, around 6:00 A.M., the petitioner and others allegedly spread cattle dung in the complainant's courtyard and when objected, they abused, assaulted him, put a gun to his temple, threatened him to vacate the land and demanded Rs. 50,000/- as extortion.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the Complaint is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the Complaint and the petitioner has acted upon sale deed which was executed by the grandfather of the complainant in the year 1950 in favour of the father of the petitioner and from 1950 till 2022, the complainant has not raised any objection with regard to land in question and suddenly in the year 2022, he has filed the present complaint case only to harass the petitioner and the petitioner is also the agnates of the complainant.
5. The learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
3/4 petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries 9 cases other than the present and in some cases, he is on bail and in some cases, the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned Trial Court itself.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M.-1st Class, Supaul in connection with Complaint Case No. 845 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure /Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
4/4 for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Neha/- U T