Azra Hussain v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50854 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2016 Thana- PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPurnia ====================================================== AZRA HUSSAIN DAUGHTER OF KIFAYAT HUSSAIN W/O-JAMAL ANSARI, R/O-DARJIPATTI WARD 10, P.S.-BANMANKHI, DISTT.- PURNEA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

RAUSHAN ARA WIFE OF SHAMIM EJAJ R/O-DARJIPATTI WARD 10, P.S.-BANMANKHI, DISTT.-PURNEA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP Mr.Arvind Kumar Sinha, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 30-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Though vakalatnama is filed on behalf of the O.P. No.2 but despite repeated calls, nobody appears on his behalf. 2.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 420, 323, 504 and 120(B) IPC. 3.

Allegedly, even after purchasing the land bearing Khata no.171, Khesra No.1291 by the complainant, the possession of the land was not given to the complainant by the accused persons. It is alleged that Rs.30,000/- was given to three accused persons including the petitioner as commission but the same was also not returned.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. She has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50854 of 2023(4) dt.30-01-2024 2/2 been falsely implicated in this case due to grudge. The said land was executed in favour of the complainant by Mukhtadir Ansari but later on Mohan Sharma and Bhupen Sharma informed that they are the land lord of the said land and they have got this land from 'Bhudan'. The complainant has only alleged that she has given Rs.30,000/- to the petitioner and other co-accused namely Md. Jabbar and Kifayat Ansari as commission. It is further submitted that it is a matter of civil dispute and petitioner is a lady having no criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is civil dispute between the parties, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Complaint Case No.506 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T