Vikash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47355 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1992 Year-2019 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.

Vikash Kumar Son Of Brijnandan Singh, R/o Village- Mangali Chak, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna.

2.

Anand Mohan Singh @ Santu, Son Of Brijandan Singh R/o Village- Mangali Chak, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioners

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Shailendra Kumar S/o Nand Kumar Sinha Resident of village-charmed, P.S..-Msaurhi, District-Patna ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party No. 2 :

Mr.Anant Kumar Mishra, Advocate :

Mr. Shailesh Kumar Advocate.

For the State :

Ms.Gulzar Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 11-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners in the present case are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No- 1992 (C) 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. They have got no criminal antecedent.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that they received Rs. 21,00,000/- from the complainant and got a sale deed executed by one Raju Kumar Yadav with respect to plot situated at Mauza- Parsa, Phulwarisharif, Patna which belonged to the parents Raju Kumar Yadav saying that his parents are no more. Later on, when the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47355 of 2023(2) dt.11-08-2023 2/2 complainant started constructing boundary on the said land, some people gathered there and objected the said construction and disclosed that the father and the mother of the co-accused Raju Kumar Gupta are alive and Raju Kumar Gupta had fabricated the false death certificates of his mother and father and sold the said land in the name of the complainant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false, fabricated and concocted.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6. Having regard to the allegation that these petitioners had received huge amount from the complainant and got sale deed executed by one Raju Kumar Gupta with respect to the property which belonged to his parents saying that his parents are no more, in the nature of the fraud alleged against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is, thus, refused.

8. This application stands dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T