Arbind Kumar @ Arbind Kumar Sinha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38427 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2015 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Aurangabad ====================================================== ARBIND KUMAR @ ARBIND KUMAR SINHA Son of Gokul Prasad Resident of Village - Kara, P.S. - Obra, District - Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Niru Devi Wife of Rajendra Prasad Resident of Bratpur, P.S. - Aurangabad, District - Aurangabad.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Purushotam Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 16-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 406,467,468,420,120B of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Complaint Case No.303/2015.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with sale of a piece of land belonging to Ajit Sinha allegedly registered by co-accused Raju Sinha in favour of the complainant. It is submitted that the petitioner is merely an identifier in the sale deed. The aforesaid co-accused Raju Sinha has been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38427 of 2019(3) dt.16-09-2019 2/2 in Bail Petition No.754/2018 in the backdrop of compromise entered into between Raju Sinha and the complainant. The petitioner claims clean antecedent.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the petition submitting that the petitioner had received Rs.2,00,000/- as Baibiyana for the sale of land, as stated in para-2 of the complaint petition. It is further stated that petitioner has fraudulently acted in identifying co-accused Raju Sinha as the owner of the land, Ajit Sinha in the sale deed.
5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and the gravity of the offence alleged, this court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed (Vikash Jain, J) Prakash Narayan /- U T