Bharat Pandit v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28142 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2023 Thana- TATARPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.

Bharat Pandit Son Of Late Yaddu Pandit Resident Of Village- Digghi, PsMasudanpur, Dist- Bhagalpur 2.

Bhagwan Pandit Son Of Late Yaddu Pandit Resident Of Village- Digghi, PsMasudanpur, Dist- Bhagalpur 3.

Laxman Pandit Son Of Late Yaddu Pandit Resident Of Village- Digghi, PsMasudanpur, Dist- Bhagalpur 4.

Mukesh Pandit Son Of Bindeshwari Pandit Resident Of Village- Kerela, PsMasudanpur, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kapil Dev Yadav Son Of Late Ayodhya Pd. Yadav Village- Sahebganj, PsUniversity, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Nirmala Kumari, A.P.P.

Mr. Rajni Kant Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioners refused to execute sale deed in favour of the informant even after receiving part consideration money pursuant to the agreement.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that from bare perusal of the F.I.R. it is apparent that the dispute

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28142 of 2024(3) dt.01-07-2024 2/2 between the parties is civil in nature. Acts attributed to these petitioners do not amount to criminal offence. Petitioners have not received the alleged amount and have falsely been implicated. The property in question does not belong to these petitioners. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 7th, Bhagalpur in connection with Tatarpur (University) P. S. Case No. 160 of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T