Ranjeet Kumar Ranjan @ Ranjeet Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78367 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1297 Year-2022 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE District- Saharsa ====================================================== RANJEET KUMAR RANJAN @ RANJEET JHA S/O HIRA KANT JHA NEAR KABRISTAN HATIYA GACHHI, WARD NO. 31, SAHARSA, P.SSAHARSA, DISTT.- SAHARSA, BIHAR. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Nagendra Kumar S/o- Naresh Mohan Thakur, vill.-Nawalganj, P.s.- Bhargawa, Distt.- Araria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjana Pathak, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1297 of 2022 dated 24.11.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons sold pieces of land to the informant (in the name of the informant's wife). Later, it was found that the said land was already sold to another person and caused loss of Rs. 52 lacs to the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78367 of 2023(4) dt.30-08-2024 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is a case of civil dispute. The petitioner is a priest in a Temple and he has no concern with the sale and purchase of the land. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had advised the complainant to purchase the land and introduced him with the co-accused Sarita Devi and Nitesh Kumar Singh, and advised him to purchase the said piece of land. It is further submitted that the complainant had paid the petitioner Rs. 1,00,000/- in which Rs. 10,000 is paid in the SBI Account of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the said Rs. 10,000/- money transaction was paid by the complainant to the petitioner's account for his personal reason. Similarly situated co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 31.01.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 85094 of 2023. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78367 of 2023(4) dt.30-08-2024 3/3 period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Saharsa in connection with Complaint Case No. 1297 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. This application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Jyoti/- U T