Krishna Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83776 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2018 Thana- BIKRAM District- Patna ====================================================== Krishna Yadav, Son of Dev Prasad Yadav, Resident of Village-Sundarpur, P.SBikram, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Lovekush Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 406, 420 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case got initiated with the filing of Complaint Case No. 117(c) of 2018 by Abdula Sulemani which came to be registered as Bikram P.S. Case No. 212 of 2018 after the complaint being transferred under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is alleged that one Judge Kumar executed sale deed in favour of the informant, Abdula Sulemani on which Shatrughan Kumar was a witness, on consideration amount of Rs.38,50,000/-. Subsequently, the informant came to know that the land does not belong to Judge Kumar. It is alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83776 of 2019(2) dt.18-12-2019 2/3 against the petitioner that the informant inquired from the petitioner about raiyat of the land in question and he suggested that the land does not belong to Judge Kumar. It is also alleged against the petitioner that subsequently, the petitioner assured to return the money paid to him and also witnessed to the Panchayat agreement.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner neither executed the sale deed with regard to the land in question nor he was witness to the sale deed. Subsequently, he was witness of the agreement being under raiyat of the original land holder. It is further submitted that the petitioner is accused in one another case which has been lodged by Judge Kumar against the original land holder including the petitioner.

Learned APP submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR.

Considering the fact that thrust of accusation is against Judge Kumar and Shatrughan Kumar, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83776 of 2019(2) dt.18-12-2019 3/3 each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Danapur (Patna) in connection with Bikram P.S. Case No. 212 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/- U T