Praveen Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57484 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1679 Year- 2015 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA ====================================================== Praveen Kumar son of Shree K.C. Singh, resident of Mohalla- J.D. Women's College Stree, Opposite Central Bank of India, P.s.- Shashtrinagar, Distt.- Patna .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Renu Devi, W/o- Mahesh Prasad, resident of Aakashwani Road, Khajpura, P.O.- Bihar Vetenary College, P.s.- Rajeev Nagar, District- Patna .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rajani Kant Mishra, Advocate For the Complainant :

Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Ms. Anuradha Singh(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH ORAL ORDER 2.

22-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the complainant, who has chosen to enter appearance without notice to oppose the application of the petitioner for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest in relation to Complaint Case No. 1679(C) of 2015 pending before learned Judicial Magistrte, 1st Class, Patna, registered under Section 341, 354B and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the informant does not dispute that the complainant was tenant of the petitioner in the year 2006 for a short period. Informant does not dispute that accused no. 2 in the complaint was also another landlord of the complainant. It is also not disputed that accused no. 3 to 7 are her neighbours. It is also not disputed by the complainant that earlier, in the year 2010, also she had filed a police case against the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57484 of 2015 (2) dt.22-12-2015 petitioner, which upon investigation, the police found to be false. In that case also allegations similarly were made. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant is a quarrelsome divorcee and merely having vengeance for having been asked to vacate the tenanted premises she is doing this not only against him but also with other landlord and neighbours.

Be that as it may, it appears that this is a case more out of vengeance, nothing more is required to be said at this stage, in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within four weeks, let the petitioner, namely, Praveen Kumar, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1679(C) of 2015, subject to conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) Rajeev/- U T