Allowed

Sunil Kumar Sah v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Jul 2021CR. APP (SJ)/1277/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed an appeal challenging the rejection of anticipatory bail. Finding the FIR to be based on false grounds involving a land dispute, the court set aside the refusal and granted bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act and Indian Penal Code.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside. The appellant is directed to be released on bail within eight weeks by furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Sunil Kumar Sah Vs The State of Bihar — Property and Title | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1277 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2020 Thana- SC/ST District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

SUNIL KUMAR SAH Son of Chandrama Sah Resident of Village - Shahnewazpur Saran, P.S.- Taraiya, Distt.- Saran, Bihar

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Suman Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Special P.P.

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 02-07-2021

¶14

Heard Mr. Suman Kumar Mishra, learned counsel

¶15

for the appellant and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

The appellant has challenged the order dated 09.12.2020 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran at Chapra in A.B.P. No. 2728 of 2020 arising out of Saran SC/ST P.S. Case No. 59/2020, whereby the prayer made on behalf of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail for the offences under Sections 148, 341, 341, 342, 468, 420, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r), 3(x) (i)(G), 3(i)(s) (N) of SC/ST (POA) Act has been rejected.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1277 of 2021(2) dt.02-07-2021 2/4

¶18

It has been alleged in the First Information Report

¶19

that the grandfather of the informant had purchased a land from Lalita Devi vide a registered sale deed in the year 1981 and he has been coming in possession of the said land from that time onwards. The accused persons including the appellant are alleged to have conspired and obtained that land through another sale deed. Accused no. 1 to 5 who are not the appellants here, have sold the land to the appellant who is the purchaser of the land in question. In the process of taking possession of the land which rightfully belongs to the informant, the appellant is also alleged to have abused and demeaned the informant because of his descent.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that an absolutely false case has been lodged by the informant. The appellant is a bonafide purchaser of the land in question from the son of Lalita Devi. It has been submitted that the claim of the informant is based on bogus grounds. Even otherwise, it has been submitted that even if the property was in dispute amongst the shareholders, the appellant is not to be blamed for having purchased the plot

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1277 of 2021(2) dt.02-07-2021 3/4

¶22

of land when he was made to understand that the property which he is buying is without any encumbrance. Considering this aspect of the matter, it has been urged on behalf of the appellant that none of the offences under the I.P.C. or under the SC/ST (POA), Act can at all be said to have been made out.

¶23

For the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant, this Court is inclined to interfere with the order refusing to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant.

¶24

The order dated 09.12.2020 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran at Chapra is set aside.

¶25

The appeal stands allowed.

¶26

The appellant, above named, is directed to be

¶27

released on bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-

¶28

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1277 of 2021(2) dt.02-07-2021 4/4

¶29

Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran at Chapra in

¶30

connection with Saran SC/ST P.S. Case No. 59/2020.

¶31

(Ashutosh Kumar, J)

¶32

sunilkumar/-

¶33

U T

Sunil Kumar Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Sah 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Panchdeo Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Laddu Yadav @ Swaminath Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Gulabi Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Birendra Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Subba @ Ravi Bahadur Subba Vs The State of Bihar