Allowed

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tippu Singh v. The State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC9 Aug 2019CR. MISC./9570/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Patna High Court, observing a pending civil dispute and failure of the opposite party to appear, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner against arrest in a criminal complaint.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks; to be released on bail upon furnishing Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tippu Singh Vs The State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9570 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1001 Year-2016 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tippu Singh, S/o Late Prithivichand Singh R/o Village- Harpur,P.S- Ekma, District- Saran at Chapra

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Sanjiv Kumar S/o Jagdeo Rai, resident of village-Daryaoganj, P.S-Chapra Mufassil, District- Saran @ Chapra

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

======================================================

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶14

8 09-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶15

counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶16

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.1001 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 419, 384, 420, 342/34 of the Indian Penal Code but cognizance has been taken only under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The allegation against the petitioner as per the complaint is that the petitioner along with others on the pretext of providing job took a sum of Rs. 4 lakh through cash and bank transfer in the account of co-accused, Priyanka Devi. It has further been alleged that Priyanka Devi is wife of the petitioner.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9570 of 2019(8) dt.09-08-2019 2/3

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated inasmuch as both the parties are related and the mother of the complainant had purchased a piece of land from the aunt of the petitioner in which petitioner is the witness. Learned counsel further submits that the aunt of the petitioner is issue less having no bank account and as such consideration amount of the said land sold by aunt of the petitioner was deposited in the bank account of Priyanka Kumari, who is sister of the petitioner, not wife, as alleged in the complaint.

¶20

Despite the time having been granted to the counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2 on 31.07.2019, no supplementary affidavit has been filed by learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2. Learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2 also did not appear on 7.8.2019 and today also when the matter was called, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.2.

¶21

After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and taking into consideration the fact that there appears to be a civil dispute between family of petitioner and family of complainant and title suit and partition suit is pending between them, as such,

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9570 of 2019(8) dt.09-08-2019 3/3

¶23

I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶24

Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of surrender by him, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the Court below upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Saran at Chapra, subject to the condition as mentioned under Section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶26

sanjeev/-

¶27

U T

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tippu Singh v. The State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tippu Singh v. The 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suman Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Nayak Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Bhushan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Naresh Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Bindu Bind Vs The State of Bihar

Shatrudhan Sah Vs The State of Bihar