Allowed

Sunil Kumar Pandit and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC15 Jun 2016CR. MISC./24791/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Short order granting anticipatory bail to petitioners in a complaint case involving alleged forgery, conspiracy, and mischief related to a land dispute. The court held that the matter appeared to be a civil dispute and allowed bail subject to surrender and furnishing bonds.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to surrender within four weeks.

Sunil Kumar Pandit and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.24791 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3252 Year- 2015 Thana -SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSAHARSA

¶3

====================================================== 1. Sunil Kumar Pandit son of Laxmi Pandit. 2. Most. Dulari Devi wife of Late Yadunandan Pandit. 3. Chandan Pandit son of Late Manoj Pandit. 4. Bikram Mukhia son of Sukhdeo Mukhiya. All are resident of villagePurikh, Police Station- Bihra, District- Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar.

¶4

Fekan Pandit son of Late Bacho Pandit, Resident of village- Purikh, Police Station- Bihra, District- Saharsa.

¶5

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Goutam For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar (App)

¶6

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶7

3 15-06-2016 Supplementary affidavit is filed on behalf of the

¶8

petitioners.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as

¶10

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 3252 C of 2015 in which prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 504, 420, 467, 468, 193 of the Indian Penal Code was found true against the petitioners.

¶12

According to complaint case, petitioners no. 1 to 3

¶13

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24791 of 2016 (3) dt.15-06-2016

¶14

2/2

¶15

transferred some lands in favour of petitioner no. 4 though the said lands had fallen in the share of complainant.

¶16

Submission on behalf of the petitioners is that even if the prosecution story, as propounded by the complainant, assumed to be true, then also, it is a case of civil dispute and moreover, a proceeding under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. was initiated and in the said proceeding, the claim of petitioners no. 1 to 3 was found true.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, particularly, keeping in mind that warrants of arrest have already been issued against the petitioners, this anticipatory bail petition is allowed and it is ordered that petitioners, in the event of their arrest/ surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order to the court concerned, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S. Das, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Saharsa in Complaint Case No. 3252 C of 2015 subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶19

SHAHZAD/-

¶20

U T

Sunil Kumar Pandit and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Pandit and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bijay Kumar @ Bijay Kumar Singh @ Tuttu Vs The State Of Bihar

Yadunandan Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Shanti Devi Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sanjeev Srivastava @ Sanjeev Vs The State Of Bihar

Shailesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Lalu Mahto and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar