Md. Yahiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35168 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2020 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Md. Yahiya, male, aged about 50 years, Son of Late Maulana Usman 2.

Naznin Shama, female, aged about 46 years, Wife of Md. Yahiya 3.

Gulam Mohammad Mustafa, male, aged about 55 years, Son of Md. Yusuf All are resident of Bari Masjid Ki Gali, P.S. - Alamganj, District - Patna - 800007.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-03-2021 Heard Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Md. Aslam Ansari, learned APP for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2020, dated 17.01.2020, instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35168 of 2020(2) dt.23-03-2021 2/3 Section 52(A) of the Wakf Act, 1995.

The petitioner No. 1 is alleged to be the vendor of five kathas of land to petitioner No. 2, who is the vendee. The petitioner No. 3 is said to be the witness to the saledeed. The accusation in the F.I.R. as against the petitioner No. 1 is of having sold the land of the Shiya Wakf Board which he was not entitled to sell.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the land in question was the ancestral property of one late Al Abad Sayed Ali Asad, who has executed Hiba (gift) in the name of petitioner No. 1 wayback in the year 2013. Ever since the aforesaid execution of Hiba, the petitioner No. 1 had been coming in possession of the said land. Tax receipt and Khatiyan in support of the aforesaid contention on behalf of the petitioners have been brought on record.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that none of the offences of the I.P.C. can at all be said to have been made out from the facts alleged in the F.I.R. So far as Section 52(A) of the Wakf Act, 1995 is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35168 of 2020(2) dt.23-03-2021 3/3 concerned, only a complaint with respect to such offence could have been filed.

Considering the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, they, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Chhapra, Saran in connection with Sonpur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Praveen-II/- U T