Renu Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39337 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-541 Year-2023 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== Renu Devi Wife of Prabhat Ranjan Yadav Resident of Village- Gangti, P.S -Amas ,Dist -Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Suraj Deo Yadav Son of Late Barat Yadav Resident of Village- Gangti, P.SAmas , Dist- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. S. Jamil Akhter, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 26-06-2024 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 541 of 2023 for the offence punishable under sections 420, 468 of the I.P.C. filed on 18.08.2023 by the complainant, Suraj Deo Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the complainant alleged that the petitioner alongwith Madhav Jha wanted Rs. 1,00,000/- for the treatment of Renu Devi's mother. He accordingly provided Rs. 90,000/-. The accused agreed to sale a piece of land (34.5 decimal) for a consideration amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Later, they wanted the rest of the amount so that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39337 of 2024(2) dt.26-06-2024 2/3 land is registered. When the complainant demanded the papers, the same was not provided and six months later, came with a 'bakshishnama' of 1989 in which the name of her husband was also written whereas her birth itself took place in 1989. When the complainant confronted that it is a forged paper and as such, he should return Rs. 90,000/-, earlier she was ready but later despite legal notice on 10.07.2023, there was no reply. The allegation is that later on 12.08.2023, they came to his place, abused and assaulted. Accordingly, the complaint.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a false statement that Rs. 90,000/- was provided to her and the complainant is in the habit of filing false and fabricated case. The document of the year, 2015 cannot be taken into account after eight years.
5. Learned APP, on the other hand, points out that the specific allegation is against the petitioner of having taken the amount for the treatment of her mother and later, came out with a 'bakshishnama' 1989 which was the year of her birth but name of her husband was also incorporated in it. He submits that there was clear intention of the petitioner to cheat the complainant.
6. Taking into account the submission put forward by the parties and the contention of the learned APP, it would be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39337 of 2024(2) dt.26-06-2024 3/3 appropriate that the petitioner seek bail, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J) kiran/- U T