Jaimun Nisha v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18473 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1147 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Jaimun Nisha Wife of Md. Ainul Haque , Resident of Village- Dhurwar, P.S.- Parsauni, District- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Karmveer Kumar @ Karmvir Kumar, Son of Sri Satyendra Sah, Resident of Village- Runnisaidpur, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nawal Kishor Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-04-2017 The Opposite party No.2 has been made accused in a complaint case lodged by the petitioner alleging commission of offence punishable under Sections 354, 420 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been allowed anticipatory bail by an order, dated 06.03.2017, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi. The petitioner, in the present application seeks cancellation of bail so granted to the Opposite party No.2.

From the materials on record, I find that there is allegation that the petitioner and her husband had got executed a sale deed in their favour by Opposite party No.2 on 06.01.2016 for which the Opposite party No.2 had received a sum of Rs.

16,50,000/- from the complainant and after the registry, when the petitioner attempted to get mutation in her favour, she learnt that the land has not been mutated in favour of Opposite party No.2. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has criminal antecedent inasmuch as he is an accused in three cases registered for the offences punishable under Sections 385 and 387 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.

On perusal of the order passed by the Court below, I do not find wrong exercise of discretion in grant of anticipatory bail. I do not find any reason to cancel the bail which has already been granted to Opposite party No.2. No ground of cancellation of bail is made out.

This application is accordingly, dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ArunKumar/- U