Sheikh Imam @ Sheikh Imran @ Imam Hussain v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30382 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-573 Year-2019 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== SHEIKH IMAM @ SHEIKH IMRAN @ IMAM HUSSAIN Son of Md. Alam Resident of Village - Beldari, P.S.- Bettiah (Mufassil), District - West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. A.G.

For the O.P. No. 2 :

Mr. Aditya Nath Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-02-2021 Heard Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Nath Jha, learned APP for the State. The State is represented by the learned APP.

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Bettiah (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 573 of 2019 dated 16.10.2019 instituted for the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 384, 379 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

From the FIR, it appears that the accusation against the petitioner is of having taken the land of the informant on rent for the purposes of carrying on business. Later, the informant has alleged that the signature of the informant was taken on the false

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30382 of 2020(4) dt.22-02-2021 2/3 pretext of getting electric connection and that signature was misused for forging a document for conveyance of the land in question.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the complaint lodged by him against the opposite party no. 2. Though the aforesaid complaint has been lodged after several months of the lodging of the subject FIR, but from the perusal of the FIR, it appears that the petitioner as well as opposite party no. 2 are relatives and there is a dispute with respect to the conveyance of a land which the petitioner claims that he had an agreement in his favour for the transfer of the said land after paying a consideration amount of Rs. 6 lakhs.

The aforesaid argument is sought to be repelled by the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 by stating that there is nothing on record to suggest that money was paid to the informant.

In fact, this Court has not been able to find out any document to indicate that the accusation in the subject FIR is correct. Considering this aspect of the matter, on 18.12.2020, provisional bail was granted to the petitioner.

Considering the circumstances of the case, the provisional bail of the petitioner is hereby confirmed and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30382 of 2020(4) dt.22-02-2021 3/3 made absolute. The petitioner shall remain on the same bail bonds.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T