Ranjeet Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59485 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2022 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar Singh S/o- Late Ram Umed Singh R/o Village- Bhikhanpur, P.S.- Ahiyarpur, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Senior Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Majid Mahboob Khan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-03-2023 Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Majid Mahboob Khan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 419, 467 and 468/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to prosecution case, the land of the informant was sold to the vendees by two persons who represented themselves as son of informant's wife through four

2/4 sale deeds and in all the sale deeds, petitioner is an identifier and accused Jamal Khan, Patan Kawai are as witnesses. It is further alleged that all the accused persons by committing forgery on the basis of forged documents sold the informant's land and he neither knows them nor recognize them. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that initially the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. He further submits that neither the petitioner has sold the land in question nor has purchased the same. He further submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that he is only the identifier and there is no conspiracy on the part of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner identify the vendors who are his village people.

He further submits that as far as the allegation of Rs. 30,00,000/- which has come in the account of the petitioner is concerned, he submits that in good faith he took the amount in his account and subsequently, transferred it to the accounts of the vendors who are his co-villagers. He further submits that the supervising authority have found that under criminal conspiracy the vendor accused nos.

3/4 authority, the name of the petitioner and other people have been added as accused in the F.I.R. on 28.07.2022. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 27.07.2022.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner was involved in the present occurrence. They further submits that the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present one.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No. 506 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present

4/4 as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T