Allowed

Usha Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Jul 2021CR. MISC./15008/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in an FIR regarding sale deed disputes under Sections 419 and 420 IPC, subject to conditions including furnishing bond after restoration of normalcy, directing her to cure defects within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on personal bond pending defect removal; directed to furnish regular bail bond within eight weeks of normalcy restoration.

Usha Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15008 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2020 Thana- DEEPNAGAR District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

USHA DEVI, aged about 50 years, Female, W/o Late Pramod Singh, R/o village- Indrapur, Berauti, P.S.- Deepnagar, District- Nalanda.

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhilesh Dutta Verma, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate. ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 08-07-2021

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to

¶10

remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from the date of restoration of normalcy.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through Virtual mode.

¶12

The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 419 and 420 of the I.P.C.

¶13

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the informant Babita Devi had purchased a piece of land bearing Khata No. 62, Khesra No. 1645, Area 2.34 Decimal for consideration amount of Rs. 2,58,000/- from the petitioner in presence of her two sons, namely, Amit Kumar and Dilip Kumar on 28.01.2014 vide Sale Deed No. 80 and Sale Deed dated 25.04.2014 as they

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15008 of 2021(3) dt.08-07-2021 2/3

¶15

claimed that the land falls under the share of the petitioner. After registration of the land in question, the husband of the informant told the petitioner to transfer the possession of land after measurement then petitioner and co-accused persons started dilly-delaying tactics and thereafter when the informant’s husband went on the land then he learnt that fresh soil on the said land was lying there and later on got knowledge that the said land does not belong to Usha Devi (petitioner). The petitioner sold the land to the informant having ulterior motive and for unlawful advantage.

¶16

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. She has been made accused in the present case due to mistake of fact. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is a lady. As per allegation, there was agreement for sale and subsequently sale deed was executed by the petitioner in favour of the informant but subsequently delivery of possession was not given by the petitioner to the informant. The matter relates to the civil dispute between the parties.

¶17

On behalf of the learned counsel for the State, it has been submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15008 of 2021(3) dt.08-07-2021 3/3

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on her personal bond to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in connection with Deepnagar P.S. Case No. 49/2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶20

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioners shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) only each with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶21

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶22

U.K./- U T

Usha Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usha Devi 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

Anoj Sharma @ Anuj Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Fulmati Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Shashi Ranjan Kumar @ Shashideo Kumar @ Pachkhuria Vs The State of Bihar

Pancham Kumar Yaduvanshi @ Pancham Lal @ Pancham Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar