Ramanand Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58413 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1293 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ramanand Singh S/O Haridwar Singh R/O Vill. and P.O. and P.S.- Kochas, Dak Bangla Market, Dist.- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Mumtaz Ansari S/O Akhtar Hussain R/O Vill.- Kochas, Adhar Nagar, P.O. and P.S.- Kochas, Dist.- Rohtas.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kanhaiya Kishor, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61(2) and 115(2) of the BNS.

3. The case of the prosecution based on complaint petition is that the petitioner introduced the complainant to one Umesh and an agreement between Umesh and the complainant was executed. Further allegation is that for consideration of Rs.31 Lakh on a non-judicial stamp of Rs.1,000/-, an agreement was made between them. It is further alleged that Rs.24 Lakhs has been transferred by the complainant to Umesh through

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58413 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/2 phonepe and cheque. It is also alleged that Umesh Singh has returned Rs.7 Lakhs and he is not returning the rest 17 Lakhs.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is only the introducer. He has got no connection with the land or with the agreement. No amount has been received by the petitioner. The petitioner is a man of clean antecedent. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 11.07.2025.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail to the petitioner.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 1293 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rohtas at Sasaram.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T