Sita Ram Paswan @ Sita Ram Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 80447 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-331 Year-2018 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== Sita Ram Paswan @ Sita Ram Prasad Son of Late Bharosi Paswan Resident of Village - Lodipur, P.S. - Belaganj, District - Gaya (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
Ravindra Raushan Son of Shri Rajendra Prasad Resident of Village - Lodipur, Tola - Kanhil, P.S. - Belaganj, District - Gaya (Bihar) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Koushlendra Narayan, Advocate Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate (O.P.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 09-12-2024 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Gaya Complaint Case No. 331 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 379, 341, 323, 406, 420, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code wherein cognizance has been taken for the offence under Sections 420, 323, 504 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 19.11.2015, Sita Ram Paswan executed sale deed in favour of another person namely, Ranjeet Sao in which Sita Ram Paswan has changed his name as Sita Ram Prasad and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 80447 of 2024(2) dt.09-12-2024 2/2 also changed his father's name. On 21.02.2018 complainant demanded his money back from Sita Ram Paswan. Upon which he abused and assaulted him. Petitioner also took out Rs. 5,000/- from informant and threatened him to implicate in false SC/ST (POA) Act case.
4. This anticipatory bail application is not maintainable inasmuch as the petitioner was granted provisional bail after he surrendered before the learned Court below vide order dated 30.11.2018. However, due to non-fulfillment of the conditions, as undertaken by the petitioner, the bail bond of the petitioner was cancelled on 15.10.2024.
5. Considering the above fact, the present anticipatory bail is not maintainable.
6. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T