Ranjeet Rajak @ Ranjit Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83567 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2024 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== Ranjeet Rajak @ Ranjit Rajak S/o- Late Kandahi Rajak Moh- Brahamni Ghat,P.s.Vishunupad District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 84773 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2024 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== Vikash Kumar Son of Ramu Rajak Resident of Mohalla- Mahadev Ghat, Ramna Road, P.S.- Civil Line, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 83567 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 84773 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 20-12-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners in this application pray for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case no. 341 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2/4

3. As per allegation in the F.I.R, the informant states that the petitioner Vikas Kumar came with two persons including Ranjeet Rajak. It is stated that they insisted that the informant should purchase 2380 sq.ft. land which was dispute free. As a result an agreement was arrived at. The informant states that he paid a sum of Rs.25 lakhs to Vikash Kumar and Aman Rajak and a further sum of Rs.8.5 lakhs. However, when the time came for execution of the registered document they started avoiding the same. The informant further states that Vikash Kumar took away his laptop and sold it to some hospital owner. An agreement was also entered into between the parties on 8.6.2024. Some other person was made to misrepresent Ranjeet Rajak for execution of the agreement. It is finally stated that all the accused have taken away Rs.25 lakhs for the land and further Rs.8.5 lakhs has been taken by Vikash Kumar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Ranjeet Kumar submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. On reading of the FIR itself it would be evident that the case has been filed over a dispute relating to differences over on agreement for sale with respect to an immovable property. A civil dispute has been given the colour of criminal case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and undertakes to

3/4 cooperate in the investigation/trial.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Vikash Kumar submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There has been business transaction between the parties and contrary to the allegations it is the informant who owes a sum of Rs.88,000/- to the petitioner. Further there is unexplained delay of 21 days in lodging of the FIR. In a dispute being purely civil in nature, a criminal case has been filed. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.

6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that not only the petitioners are named in the FIR but there is direct allegation against them of having taken Rs.25 lakhs on one occasion and Rs.8.5 lakhs on another. Part of the transaction has taken place by transfer of the amount to their bank accounts. Further referring to the agreement for sale it is submitted that the sale deed not having been executed it is clearly a case of cheating and criminal breach of trust. The prayer for bail be rejected.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation in the F.I.R., the allegations arising out of an agreement for sale of

4/4 immovable property, it is directed that both the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case no. 341 of 2024 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. 1st, Gaya. (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T