Gangadhar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90391 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-572 Year-2023 Thana- KHAGARIA COMPALINT CASE District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.

Gangadhar Kumar Son of Hriday Nrayan Yadav @ Kokay Yadav 2.

Md. Jaki son of Md Islam 3.

Pankaj Kumar son of Late Hari Ram Yadav 4.

Ramudgar Prasad Yadav Son of Late Nunu Lal Yadav 5.

Achhutanand Singh Son of Late Birendra Narayan Singh. Resident of petitioner Nos.1 to 3 at village- Raun, P.S.-Alauli, DistrictKhagaria. Resident of petitioner No.4 KatibLicense No.26/2020, District Registry Office, Khagaria, District-Khagaria.

Resident of petitioner No.5 Assistant Investigating Officer, District Registry Office, Khagaria, Dist- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Dinesh Sharma Son of Late Bhutto Mistry @ Bhutto sharma Village- Raun, Ps- Alauli, Dist- Khagaria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vikramadit, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2025 Heard Mr.Vikramadit, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jai Narain Thakur,learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.572(C) of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420,467,34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2/4

3. According to prosecution case, all the petitioners are involved in forgery of Land Document which belongs to complainant and on objection, they assaulted the brother and son of complainant and took Rs.5,000/- from the pocket of complainant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the complaint petition is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint petition. In fact the petitioner No.1 had purchased the land in question from one Hriday Narayan Yadav after paying the consideration amount on 26.09.2023 through Registered sale deed bearing Deed No. 6509 and the said land had purchased by Hriday Narayan Yadav by one Bhutto Mistrey who is grand father of complainant and petitioner No.1 is son Hriday Narayan Yadav and petitioner No.1 had purchased the land in question from his father and the complainant has made the accused all the persons including the staff of the Registry Office and petitioner No.1 is the purchase, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are witnesses of the deed in question and petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are Staffs of the Registry Office.

3/4

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioners have clean antecedent and land in question has been purchased by the petitioner No.1 to one Hriday Narayan Yadav who happens to be the father of petitioner No.1 and the father of petitioner No.1 has purchased the land in question from one Bhutto Mistry who happens to be the grandfather of the present complainant, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Khagaria in connection with Complaint Case No.

4/4 on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T