Suresh Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39585 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-457 Year-2023 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Suresh Singh Son Of Late Ramswaroop Thakur R/O Vill.- Shekhi Chakia, P.S.- Chakia, Dist.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sangeet Deokuliar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 03-06-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant who has appeared suo moto.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chakia P.S. Case no. 457 of 2023 registered under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that he purchased the land in question as fully described in the F.I.R from three vendors, namely, Surendra Thakur, Anand Kumar Thakur and Most. Jaikar Devi through a registered sale deed on paying a consideration amount of Rs. 15 lakhs. Subsequently on filing an application for mutation it transpired
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39585 of 2024(2) dt.03-06-2024 2/3 that the land belonged to P.W.D. It is further stated that the petitioner was one of the identifiers on the sale deed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that from the allegations in the F.I.R itself it would transpire that the petitioner was not the vendor of the property in question nor was any sale consideration paid to him. He has been falsely been implicated in the case. He is in custody since 13.3.2024 and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant files his vakalatnama in Court which is taken on record. It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that the petitioner happens to be part of the racket which is involved in similar transactions in the past. The petitioner has a number of criminal antecedents. It is at the instigation of the petitioner that the informant went ahead with the transaction in question as narrated in the F.I.R.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R, the petitioner not being a vendor in the sale deed in question and his being in custody since 13.3.2024, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Chakia P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39585 of 2024(2) dt.03-06-2024 3/3 Case no. 457 of 2023, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari.
(Partha Sarthy, J) Harsh/- U T