The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of cheating in a property transaction dispute, releasing them on bail bonds with conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Petitioners to be released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties within six weeks or upon arrest/surrender.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7392 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1013 Year-2018 Thana- GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
... ... Petitioners
Versus
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Sen Prasad Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
Petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1013 of 2018 giving rise to Trial No. 2208 of 2018, lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
Prosecution case is that there was talk between the petitioners and the complainant about purchase of 2 katha 7 dhoors of land of plot No. 530 of Khata No. 116 in the consideration amount of Rs.12,000,00/- and it is said that petitioners paid Rs.2.38 lac and rest amount of Rs.9.8 lac
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7392 of 2019(4) dt.02-05-2019 2/3
remained due to the petitioners and they have not executed sale deed nor returned the amout and they have cheated the complainant.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention towards Annexure-3 and submitted that complainant has filed an affidavit before the Executive Magistrate stating that she has earlier sent a legal notice due to instigation of her mother-in-law and the case has been filed after 2 and a half years of the execution of the sale deed. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact the mother-in-law of the complainant has filed a suit being Title Suit No. 384 of 2017 against the complainant and in order to make defence in title suit the present case has been filed.
Heard learned APP and learned counsel for opposite party No.2, who has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that the agreement itself disclosed the same.
Having heard both sides and in the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the receipt of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7392 of 2019(4) dt.02-05-2019 3/3
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-XVI, Gopalganj, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1013 of 2018 giving rise to Trial No. 2208 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioners shall be a local person having sufficient immoveable properties within the jurisdiction of the court concerned and further condition is that petitioners have to co-operate in disposal of trial.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
spal/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prem Kumar Pathak
Amit Kumar Pathak
The State of Bihar
Sunita Deve
Vinod Kumar Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
