Samastipur v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 406, 420
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Considering the backdrop of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on…
Judgment
The State of Bihar Ramakant Rai Son of Late Hajari Rai Resident of Village- Kursaha, P.S.- Mohiuddin Nagar, District- Samastipur ... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER Mr. Anirudh Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Rajendra Singh, A.P.P. 2 12-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
According to F.I.R., the son of the complainant, on an agreement, got executed the land on a consideration amount of Rs. 29,50,000/-. It is alleged that this petitioner took Rs. 4,11,000/- from the son of the complainant but later on the land in question was found to be disputed. When son of the complainant requested to return the advance money, this petitioner returned Rs. 2,00,000/- and refused to return the remaining amount of Rs. 2,11,000/-. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13204 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. As a matter of fact, entire advance money i.e. Rs. 4,11,000/- has been returned to the son of the complainant by the petitioner. Moreover, dispute is of civil nature and petitioner has been made accused only with a view to harass the petitioner.
Operative part
Considering the backdrop of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur Mufassil P. S. Case No. 355 of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Navya/- U T (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 406, 420; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.