[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Archana Saraf vs The State Of Bihar on 5 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72553 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2023 Thana- DARBHANGA District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Raghav Saraf Son of Dilip Saraf Resident of Shyamkunj, Village-Mirzapur
Chowk, Opp -I.O.C Petrol Pump, PS- Town Sadar, Distt.- Darbhanga, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 26384 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2023 Thana- DARBHANGA District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Archana Saraf Son of Dilip Saraf @ Dilip Kumar Saraf village- Mirzapur
Chowk, Ps- Town, Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal S/O- Late Ramnath Choudhary, Vill- Mufti Mohalla
PS-Nagar Darbhanga, Dist- Darbhanga pin code- 846004
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 72553 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kanchan Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh
For the informant Mr. Padmanabh Kashyap
Mr. Deepak Kumar
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 26384 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kanchan Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Humayou Ahmad Khan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
7 05-08-2025
As both these bail applications arise from the same
police station case number, hence, with consent of parties, they
are being heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel
for the opposite party no. 2.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72553 of 2024(7) dt.05-08-2025
2/4
3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420,
406, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. The allegation in the first information report is that
the informant entered into an agreement for sale with one
Anamika Singh for a plot of land and in view of the same,
besides giving money to the said Anamika Singh, payment was
also made to these petitioners along with others. However,
despite several request of the informant, the sale deed was never
executed in his favour and thus, he was cheated.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it
would be apparent from the first information report itself that the
agreement to sale was with co-accused Anamika Singh, who was
the owner of the said plot of land. So far as these petitioners are
concerned, even according to the details of payment which forms
a part of the first information report, would show that an amount
of Rs. 9,00,000/- has been handed over to these petitioners and
that too in cash. There is neither any account transaction nor any
chit of paper to substantiate the fact that the said amount was
ever handed over to the petitioners. The only factor going against
the petitioners is that the petitioners are only the witnesses to the
agreement to sale. It has been submitted that most of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72553 of 2024(7) dt.05-08-2025
3/4
payment through RTGS has been paid into the account of the co-
accused Anamika Singh and her sons which would be evident
from the details of payment in the FIR. Further, the petitioners
are themselves being harassed by the informant who is a land
Mafia/grabber and a complaint case bearing RC No. 1231 of
2023 has been filed by the petitioner Raghav Saraf against the
present informant relating to threatening etc. In any view of the
matter, it has been submitted that it is out and out a civil dispute
relating to money transaction between the petitioners and the co-
accused persons.
6. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the opposite party no. 2, however, strongly oppose the
application for anticipatory bail. It has been submitted on behalf
of the opposite party no. 2 that an amount of Rs. 12,00,000/- was
taken by these petitioners who had actually acted as liasoning
agents and now they are trying to shirk off from their
responsibility. It has also been pointed out that the petitioners are
accused in another case of similar nature and hence, they do not
deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Taking into consideration the fact that there is no
substantive material against the petitioners but for the fact that
they have signed the agreement to sale as witnesses, let the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72553 of 2024(7) dt.05-08-2025
4/4
above named petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Darbhanga Sadar Town P.S. Case No. 303 of 2023, subject to the
condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S. subject to the further condition
that the petitioner would cooperate in the process of
investigation and would make themselves available before the
Investigating Agency as a when required and in case of non-
cooperation, the prosecution would be at liberty to file an
application for cancellation of bail.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link