Dayali Jamadar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.25952 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -308 Year- 2016 Thana -GARDANIBAGH District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Dayali Jamadar aged about 68 years, s/o late Dular Chand Jamadar, resident of Deokali, P.S.- Dhanarua, P.O.- Bir, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP Mr. Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 3/ 17-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as counsel for the informant. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Gardanibagh P.S. Case No.308 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 341, 323, 379, 447, 452, 420, 467, 468, 471 Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged in the written report that the informant entered into agreement for sale with Sudhanshu Paswan and Suraj Paswan on 01.09.2016 with respect to the land as mentioned in the written report. On 14.10.106 when they went for measurement of the land, then this petitioner raised objection and claimed that he has purchased the property. It is alleged in the Complaint Petition, which was sent to PS under Section 156
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25952 of 2018 (3) dt.17-05-2018 2/3 (3)Cr.P.C. that the Complainant/informant got copy of the sale deed dated 15.03.2010 through Internet from which it appears that this petitioner got the same sale deed executed in the name of his wife and other accused persons also helped him. In the Counter Affidavit filed by the informant, it is stated that ancestor of Bhaju Tiwari executed sale deed in 1991 and Dinesh Tiwari has no right and title over the land. He has no right to sale the land, in question, in favour of wife of the petitioner on 09.09.2016.
This Court finds that it is a matter of purely civil dispute.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioner, named above, within six weeks from today in connection with Gardanibagh P.S. Case No.308 of 2016, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Sub Judge XIV, Patna, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P. C. with further conditions: (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25952 of 2018 (3) dt.17-05-2018 3/3 jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel his bail bond and (3) if petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T