Pramod Mishra v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29721 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-410 Year-2022 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== PRAMOD MISHRA Son of Late Ramjatan Mishra Resident of village - Lagunaha Bairagani, P.S. - Chanpatia, Distt. - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pranav Kumar Mr. Lalan Kumar Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-10-2023 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Chanpatia P.S. Case No.410 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegedly, the petitioner took consideration money from the complainant and executed a sale deed in favour of the complainant and his brother. The complainant alleged that prior to selling the said land to them, he and his brother came to know that the petitioner had already gifted the said land in favour of his wife namely, Neeta Devi.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29721 of 2023(3) dt.03-10-2023 2/2 has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. He submits that the petitioner has not executed any sale deed in favour of the complainant or his brother. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the complainant produced a bainama in the Court from which it is apparent that the petitioner has executed sale deed in favour of the informant.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as considering the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.
7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T