Allowed

Kumara Sushma v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Nov 2021CR. MISC./2380/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous matter arising from PS. Case No.-45, 2015, the High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, a farmer accused of offences under the IPC involving forged rent receipts. The order was subject to specific conditions including deposit of court fees by a nominated date.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions of depositing court fee and removing defects within four weeks.

Kumara Sushma Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2380 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2015 Thana- SIGAUDI District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Kumari Sushma W/o Satendra Kumar Resident of Village- Narauli, P.S.Sigori, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 16-11-2021

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶12

learned APP for the State.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected

¶14

to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for

¶15

depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by the office when called upon to do so by the office.

¶16

The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 477A/34 of the

¶17

Indian Penal Code.

¶18

The informant alleged that an enquiry was held

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2380 of 2021(2) dt.16-11-2021 2/3

¶20

and it was found that Sigori PACS purchased paddy from the farmers on the basis of fake rent receipt of land and the Circle officer, Paliganj issued enforcement order without verification of the rent receipts which caused huge loss to the government money.

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is farmer and she paid revenue of his land and the Revenue Clerk issued rent receipt in the name of the petitioner and if the rent receipt is forged, the petitioner cannot be held responsible for issuance of forged rent receipt. Moreover, other similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.03.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35047 of 2020.

¶22

In the facts and circumstance of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousands)

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2380 of 2021(2) dt.16-11-2021 3/3

¶24

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1^st , Danapur, Patna in connection with Sigori P.S. Case No. 45 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶26

Shageer/-

¶27

U T

Kumara Sushma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumara Sushma 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

Rishidev Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar @ Bokash Kumar Rai @ Bikas Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Vipin Kumar @ Bipin Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Shiv Shankar Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Sah @ Pankaj Vs The State of Bihar