Brijesh Pandey @ Brijesh Kumar Pandey @ Pintu Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36129 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2024 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== Brijesh Pandey @ Brijesh Kumar Pandey @ Pintu Pandey Son Of Ramashankar Pandey Village- Kamalnath Nagar, Ps- Bettiah (TOWN), DistWest Champaran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar No.2, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and opposite party no.2.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 506, 420, 408/506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, informant is elder brother of the petitioner and their parents live with the petitioner. Informant alleges that the house is in the name of their mother and its value is Rs.44 lacs. It was agreed between the parties that as soon as informant pays Rs.22 lacs to the petitioner, the house in question shall be transferred by their mother in favour of the informant by way of registered sale

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36129 of 2024(5) dt.30-09-2024 2/3 deed. Informant paid Rs.22 lacs to the petitioner executing Ekrarnama on 13.4.2022. Later on, petitioner neither brought the mother at Bettiah for registration of the deed nor did he return the money already paid to him for the said land.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner denies the allegation and submits that the petitioner and his mother has never executed so called Ekrarnama dated 13.4.2022 and even petitioner has not enclosed said Ekrarnama with the FIR. It is further submitted that the dispute is purely of civil nature. Besides this, mere breach of agreement does not give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating, unless fraudulent and dishonest intention is shown at the beginning of the transaction. Opposite party no.2 has got other remedy available in law.

5. Learned counsel for the State as well as the opposite party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks from today, let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in Bettiah Town Police Station Case No. 08 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36129 of 2024(5) dt.30-09-2024 3/3 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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