Indu Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49669 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-472 Year-2020 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== 1.

INDU DEVI WIFE OFVIJAY CHANDRAVANSHI @ VIJAY KUMAR R/O- MOHALLA- LASHKARI GANJ, P.O.-P.S.- SASARAM, DISTT.- ROHTAS 2.

VIJAY CHANDRAVANSHI @ VIJAY KUMAR SON OF SHYAM JI CHANDRAVANSHI R/O- MOHALLA- LASHKARI GANJ, P.O.-P.S.- SASARAM, DISTT.- ROHTAS ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

DAYANAND DUBEY SON OF LATE JAGU DUBEY R/O- MOHALLALASHKARI GANJ, P.O.-P.S.- SASARAM, DISTT.- ROHTAS ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aakash Choudhary, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP.

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 380, 406, 420, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, but later on cognizance has been taken under Section 379, 406 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per complaint petition, the complainant gave total Rs. 9 lakh on different dates to the petitioners on the promise that they will return the aforesaid amount within one year failing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49669 of 2024(4) dt.13-12-2024 2/3 which they will sell his land in favour of the complainant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. They have falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is totally false and based on concocted facts. They have not committed any breach of trust and as per their promise refunded the due amount to the complainant. They have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application. The real fact of the matter is that the complainant is a cunning and greedy person and he wants to grab the aforesaid amount as well as the house of the petitioners illegally. Learned counsel fairly submits that for the alleged offence, there is provision of punishment of maximum three years.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of punishment for the alleged offence, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law keeping in view the judgment of the Apex

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49669 of 2024(4) dt.13-12-2024 3/3 Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil v/s. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T