Ram Janam Bind And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37671 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -251 Year- 2014 Thana -AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Ram Janam Bind

2. Chandeshwar Bind .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

State of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rewti Kant Raman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the complainant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioners Ram Janam Bind and Chandeshwar Bind are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 251 of 2014, registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. These two petitioners are alleged to have been the witness of a fraudulent deed, which has resulted in complainant executing a sale deed in favour of one Prabhu Dayal Bind. It is submitted that Prabhu Dayal Bind along with his son Kalendra Bind managed to administer some intoxicating drug in the drink of complainant who had been to the registration office stating that she was to be a witness to the sale deed of one Gita Devi. On the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37671 of 2015 (3) dt.08-01-2016 2/2 contrary, instead of making her the witness, they have made her to execute a sale deed of her own five decimal of land on which her house stands and now they are trying to forcibly takeover the possession of the said property on the basis of said fraudulent deed.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and also the material placed on record, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to these petitioners as they prima facie participated in the alleged fraudulent deed, and hence the petition is accordingly rejected. However if the petitioners surrender before the court below their case shall be considered without being prejudiced by this order on the same day.

(Anjana Mishra, J) sunil/- U T