Shambhu Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67640 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2013 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== SHAMBHU SHARMA, Son of Mithlesh Sharma, Resident of Village - Koshdihra, P.S.- Paraiya, Distt.- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Murli Dhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section under Sections 467, 468, 469, 471, 472, 419, 420, 307 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Informant has alleged that petitioner along with others have got sale deed executed of their land by committing forgery.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that they have purchased the land from the rightful owner after paying the consideration amount and dispute is of civil nature and no criminal offence is made out.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail, in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67640 of 2019(3) dt.10-12-2019 2/2 the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 01/2013 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- U T