Sarita Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67258 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-355 Year-2020 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== 1.

Sarita Tiwari W/O Rajesh Kumar Tiwari Resident Of Village- Vishwa Amarpur, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna.

2.

Renu Devi @ Renu Tiwari W/O Shambhu Sharan Tiwari Resident Of Village- Vishwa Amarpur, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna. 3.

Rajesh Kumar Tiwari S/O Gangadhar Tiwari Resident Of Village- Vishwa Amarpur, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna.

4.

Shambhu Sharan Tiwari S/O Gangadhar Tiwari Resident Of Village- Vishwa Amarpur, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna.

5.

Nawnit Kumar S/O Shambhu Sharan Tiwari Resident Of Village- Vishwa Amarpur, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Y.C.Verma, Sr. Advocate and Mrs.Priyanka Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Ajit Kumar, Addl Public Prosecutor for the informant Mr. Chakarpani, Advocate Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the State and the informant.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420/465 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the present case is outcome of a civil dispute. As a matter of fact, initially mother

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67258 of 2022(4) dt.14-03-2023 2/2 of the complainant had signed the compromise petition but latter on she deviated from it and to justify the action of her mother, complainant lodged the instant case alleging vague allegations against these petitioners.

Learned counsel appearing for the State as well as the complainant oppose the prayer for bail. They submit that this is a case of cheating and enquiry witnesses have supported the occurrence.

Considering the nature of dispute, the petitioners in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks from today, let the petitioners, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate I, Gaya in Complaint Case No. 355 of 2020(C), subject to the conditions laid down under sections 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashi/- U T