Rakesh Verma @Rakesh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6634 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2023 Thana- BAGHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Rakesh Verma @Rakesh Prasad Son Of Subhas Verma Resident Of VillagePurani Bazar Nepali Tola Ward No. 2, Ramnagar, Ps- Ramnagar, Distt- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bagaha P.S. Case No. 155 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code
3. As per the prosecution story, the accused persons named in the FIR, armed with lethal weapon had entered into the house of the informant and threatened to sell the land of her share which she had got out of her father's property, namely, Basudeo Singh. The informant has further alleged that they had got information that the land relating to Khata No. 361, Khesra No. 2762 measuring total area of 7 katha and 10 dhoor, MaujaDumaria and other lands have illegally been sold to one Bharat
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6634 of 2024(11) dt.02-04-2025 2/3 Yadav.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent person and has falsely been implicated in this case due to good relation with co-accused Bharat Yadav. From perusal of the FIR, it appears that there is dispute between co-accused Bharat Yadav and the informant because her land has been registered in favour of Bharat Yadav and his sons. He further submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner that he made pressure upon the informant nor threatened the informant nor the land of the informant has been registered in favour of the petitioner. Petitioner never went to the house of informant along with co-accused Bharat Yadav for making pressure and creating fear for registering the land in favour of co-accused Bharat Yadav and even he did not ask the informant for registering the land.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. During course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of District-sub-Registrar. It appears that the petitioner being licensee deed writer has not scribed the aforesaid sale deed. From perusal of para 11 of the counter affidavit it appears
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6634 of 2024(11) dt.02-04-2025 3/3 that the aforesaid deed was presented by the seller and purchaser and the same was not drafted by any licensed deed writer. So, keeping in view the aforesaid facts it appears that there is no role of the petitioner in the aforesaid alleged occurrence.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, west Champaran in connection with Bagaha P. S. Case No. 155 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (S. B. Pd. Singh, J) prabhakar/- U T