Pravin Singh @ Pravin Snehi @ Baua Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58216 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2024 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Pravin Singh @ Pravin Snehi @ Baua Singh Son of Late Suresh Prasad Singh R/O Vill.- Sukhasan Dakshin Bari, Ward no. 09, P.S.- Madhepura, Dist.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
Riya Gupta Daughter of Vinod Kumar Gupta, Wife of Amartya Kumar R/O Ward no.13, Masjid Chowk, Madhepura, P.S.- Madhepura, Dist.- Madhepura.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dinesh Maharaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey (App 84) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 384, 379, 420, 406, 467, 468, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner entered into an agreement with informant and her brother-in-law for sale of a piece of land and pursuant to that, some advance money was also paid to petitioner, but after receiving consideration money, the informant came to know that petitioner does not have ownership of said land and thereafter, she demanded her money, but petitioner refused to return the same.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58216 of 2024(2) dt.18-09-2024 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is true that petitioner entered into an agreement with informant and her brother-in-law for selling of a land measuring 4 katha 12 dhurs on a consideration sum of Rs. 57,50,000/- and in lieu thereof, only a sum of Rs. 11,51,000/- was received by petitioner, as advance, but informant has wrongly stated in the F.I.R. that an amount of Rs. 22,51,000/- was paid in advance to this petitioner. Moreover, petitioner is still ready to execute the sale-deed in terms of said agreement, however informant is putting pressure to execute the sale-deed at lesser price, and only for that purpose, this false case has been lodged. Learned counsel further submits that the dispute is purely of a civil nature and none of the acts allegedly committed by the petitioner would give rise to any criminal liability. The Informant has got some other remedy.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest/surrender before the Court below within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58216 of 2024(2) dt.18-09-2024 3/3 satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T