Dinesh Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4195 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2869 Year- 2013 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Dinesh Mahto, Son of Late Bilas Mahto @ Ram Bilas Mahto, Resident of Village - Madapur Chaubey, P.S. - Muzaffarpur Sadar, District - Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 30-01-2015 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Complaint Case No. 2869 of 2013 registered under Sections 323, 341, 504, 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant alleged that while he was returning from the market, the petitioner asked him to stop and, on such, all the accused persons snatched away money, watch, etc. from him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are false and concocted. The petitioner purchased a piece of land from the complainant Ramkumar Singh in the name of his mother, but after execution of the sale deed, the petitioner came to know that the land belongs to the State of Bihar in the name of a temple. Thereafter, a Panchayati was held and it was

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4195 of 2015 (2) dt.30-01-2015 2/2 resolved that the complainant should return the consideration amount received from the petitioner. On account of this very fact, the complainant filed this case, making false and frivolous allegations against the petitioners.

From perusal of the records, it appears that prior to lodging of this complaint case, the complainant executed a sale deed vide Annesure-2, on account of which some dispute between the parties cropped up.

Having considered facts aforesaid and the nature of allegations made against the petitioner, the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Suvash Kumar Roy, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Muzaffarpur in Trial No. 4242 of 2014, arising out of Complaint Case No. 2869 of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Dilip/- U