Ravindra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69180 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2022 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna ====================================================== RAVINDRA KUMAR SON OF JAGDISH SINGH RESIDENT OF MOHALLA -KHALILPURA, PS- PHULWARISHARIF, DISTRICT-PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
PUSHPA KUMAR WIFE OF DINESH KUMAR GUPTA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BHALUHIPUR, PS- TOWN, DIST- BHOJPUR PRESENTLY RESIDING AT MOHALLA- SARISTABAD, WEST TOLA, NEAR SBI BAN, PS- GARDANIBAGH, DIST- PATNA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinay Mistry, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad , APP For the op 2 :
Jata Shankar Jha, Advocate Sweta Kumari , Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner , opposite party No. 2 and the State .
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 406, 420, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, informant Pushpa Kumari alleged that she purchased a piece of land appertaining to Khata No 25, Survey plot no 07, measuring an area of 3.125 decimal from the petitioner through a registered sale deed. When the informant went
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69180 of 2023(3) dt.27-02-2024 2/3 for Bhumi Pujan of the land in question, the erstwhile purchaser disclosed that the said land has already been purchased by him in the year 2007 and then the informant called the petitioner on the land but the petitioner did not come there and later. threatened the informant, to face dire-consequences.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this false and concocted case. Petitioner is the bonafide owner of the land in question through registered sale deed. Petitioner has also filed a case against one Sanjeev Kumar, in T.S No 72 of 2022 before the learned Sub Judge, Patna for protection of the peaceful possession of his land. The dispute is purely civil in nature, as such, no such case under section 406 and 420 is made out against this petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the State and Opposite Party No. 2 vehemently opposes the bail petition of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69180 of 2023(3) dt.27-02-2024 3/3 circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks from today, let the petitioner, as named above, be enlarged 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 ACJM-IV Patna in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. case No. 396 of 2022 , subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T