Uma Shankar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42884 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2024 Thana- BHOJPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Uma Shankar Pandey S/O Late Triveni Pandey R/O Vill.- Diliya, P.O.- Diliya, P.s.- Chauri, Dist.- Bhojpur, Ara ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Hare Krishna Sharma S/O Shivdutt Sharma R/O Vill.- Madanpur, P.S. - Narayanpur, Dist.- Bhojpur, Ara ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Manoj Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-09-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the complainant alleges that petitioner, despite receiving an amount of Rs.9,66,000/-, did not execute sale deed of the land in favour of the complainant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42884 of 2025(3) dt.24-09-2025 2/3 complainant. It is further submitted that the petitioner never received any amount from the complainant for executing a sale deed with respect to his land. It is next submitted that there is no documentary evidence on record to even remotely suggest that the amount of Rs.9,66,000/- was given to the petitioner. It is also submitted that the complainant instead of approaching a Court of competent civil jurisdiction instituted a criminal case only with a view to coerce the petitioner into submission so that the petitioner under fear of arrest fulfills the fanciful demand of the complainant.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then are not in position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the money was not paid by any instrument.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42884 of 2025(3) dt.24-09-2025 3/3 is pending/Successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 248(C) of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T