Allowed

Bipin Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC9 Aug 2018CR. MISC./46318/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single order bail insofar as the petitioner challenged the implications of a sale transaction and a missing family member, the petitioner was granted bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura.

Bipin Singh Vs The State Of Bihar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46318 of 2018 (2) dt.09-08-2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46318 of 2018

¶4

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -122 Year- 2012 Thana -ARIYARI District- SEKHPURA

¶5

====================================================== Bipin Singh son of Sri Saligram Singh Resident of Village - Diha, P.S. - Ariari, District - Sheikhpura.

¶6

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

¶7

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Narsingh Tanti

¶8

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 09-08-2018

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶11

The petitioner is in custody since 30.06.2018 in connection with Ariyari P.S. Case No. 122 of 2012 for the offence registered under Sections 406, 420, 364, 365/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only on the basis of conjectures and surmises the informant has lodged the present case against the petitioner. It is further submitted that there is nothing on record to show that actually any amount remains due from the petitioner with regard to the sale and purchase of land which had taken place between the

¶13

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46318 of 2018 (2) dt.09-08-2018

¶14

petitioner and the informant and her son. It is further submitted that the informant herself is a signatory to the sale deed, therefore, it is not open for her to come forward at this stage making false and frivolous allegations.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State, after perusing the entire bail petition, submits that because there have been sale transaction between the petitioner and informant’s son and thereafter, her son disappeared, the allegation under Sections 364 and 365 has been made against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the informant’s son was in the habit of disappearing and earlier also she had brought back her son from Ludhiana.

¶16

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the vague and distinct nature of allegation, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura in connection with

¶17

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46318 of 2018 (2) dt.09-08-2018

¶18

Ariyari P.S. Case No. 122 of 2012.

¶19

(Anjana Mishra, J)

¶20

Jagdish/-

¶21

Bipin Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipin Singh v. The State Of Bihar

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

Teras Rai @ Teras Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Kumar Gaurav @ Vote Babu Vs The State Of Bihar

Sujeet Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Shivjee Sah and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Chhotu @ Kallu @ Ram Shankar Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Deepak Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar