Baleshwar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67782 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1039 Year-2024 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== Baleshwar Yadav S/O Karu Mahto @ Karu Yadav R/O Vill.- Ramna Tola, Telbigha, P.S.- Belaganj, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Smt. Sarda Rani Singh W/O Late Sarju Prasad Singh R/O Vill.- Ramna, P.S.- Belaganj, Dist.- Gaya At Present residing at Flat No. 356 4th Floor, Om Sai Apartment Asha Singh More, P.S.- Rampur, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Kumar Yadav, Adv.
For the State :
Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-10-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that petitioner was employed as Care taker of the house and land of the informant measuring 3 bigha. Further had agree to divide 50% of the produce, further, petitioner took an amount of Rs. 20 Lakhs with an assurance to return with interest but did not return the amount nor paid the electricity dues of the house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67782 of 2025(3) dt.13-10-2025 2/3 and when he was confronted the petitioner threatened and tried to strangulate her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to sharing of produce of the land. It is next submitted that petitioner was employed by the informant as a Manager and he was looking after the house and the land of the informant but since a dispute arose with regard to sharing of produce as such, the instant false case came to be instituted with an allegation that petitioner took an amount of Rs. 20 Lakhs by way of advance from the informant but then the F.I.R. does not disclose as to when the said amount was given to the petitioner. It is asserted and submitted that a supplementary affidavit has been filed wherein it has been specifically pleaded that petitioner is not residing in the house of informant and the electricity dues, if any, has to be cleared by the informant herself. It is next submitted that the dispute appears more civil in nature than criminal.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the fact
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67782 of 2025(3) dt.13-10-2025 3/3 that the petitioner in supplementary affidavit has stated that he does not reside in the house of the informant, as such, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Complain Case No. 1039 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
7. Office is directed to locate the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner and annexe the same with the records of the case.
8. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) pallavi/- U T