Patna High Court – Orders
Anand Thakur @ Anand Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Bihar on 25 April, 2025
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12501 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-460 Year-2023 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Anand Thakur @ Anand Kumar Thakur, S/o Jagarnath Thakur, Resident of
Village- Shekhi, Chakia, P.S- Chakia, Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Ms. Dipa Divya, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 25-04-2025
Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned Advocate
for the informant.
2. Learned Advocate for the informant seeks
permission to make necessary correction in the counter affidavit
in course of the day.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody
in connection with connection with Chakia P.S. Case No.460 of
2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419,
420, 406, 467, 468, 504, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal
Code.
5. Allegedly, the informant purchased a piece of land
having Khata No.253, Khesra No.876, Area-5.816 Decimal i.e.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12501 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025
2/5
01 Katha 4 ¾ dhur from the petitioner and other raiyat holders
through registered sale deed No.2219 after payment of
consideration amount to the tune of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees
Fifteen Lakh). Subsequent thereto, when the informant went for
mutation of the land, the same came to be rejected on the basis
of the report of Halka Karamchari, which reveals that over the
land, in question, there was a godown of Public Works
Department (P.W.D.) and it belongs to the P.W.D. On the
aforesaid fact, the informant found that he was cheated at the
hands of the petitioner, and as such, the present case has been
instituted.
6. Learned Advocate for the petitioner taking this
Court through the FIR has contended that the informant himself
admitted that before purchase of the land, in question, he
himself verified that the land was bounded by a boundary wall
and it was a khatiyani land, was recorded in the name of the
ancestor of the petitioner and others. The report of the Halka
Karamchari is not based upon any revenue record but it only
suggests that a local inspection was conducted wherein the
villagers have disclosed the fact that the land belongs to P.W.D.
It is further contended that an information under the Right to
Information Act has been sought for wherein the Circle Officer,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12501 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025
3/5
Chakia has stated that the land in question belongs to Sarju
Thakur, who is said to be ancestor of the petitioner. Moreover,
even if the allegation is taken to be true, it is out and out civil in
nature for which the informant has ample remedy available
before the civil court of competent jurisdiction. Taking note of
the aforesaid facts, co-accused persons, namely, Uday Shankar
Thakur and Binod Kumar Thakur @ Binod Thakur @ Vinod
Singh, have been allowed the privilege of anticipatory bail by
this Court in Cr. Misc. Nos.62011 of 2024 and 66577 of 2024
vide order dated 13.09.2024, which is marked as Annexure-P/2
to the bail application.
7. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
and the learned Advocate for the informant have vehemently
opposed the bail application. They have contended that the
petitioner has suppressed various facts before selling the land in
question and thereby duped the informant and cheated more
than Rs.15 lacs. Learned Advocate for the informant further
submitted that one Surendra Thakur has been granted bail by the
learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in Bail
Petition No.886 of 2024 after payment of due amount but the
petitioner refused to return the same.
8. Having considered the submissions advanced by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12501 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025
4/5
the learned Advocate for the respective parties and after going
through the allegation, this Court, prima facie, finds that the
allegation levelled in the FIR, predominantly appears to be civil
in nature; moreover other co-accused persons having identical
allegation have been accorded the privilege of anticipatory bail
and now the petitioner has been incarcerated since 17.08.2024;
the investigation of the crime is complete and the charge-sheet
has been submitted, let the petitioner, named above, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned C.J.M., East Champaran at Motihari in connection with
Chakia P.S. Case No.460 of 2023, subject to the condition that
one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner
with further conditions which are as follows:-
(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of
the trial.
(ii) He will remain present on each and every date
of trial till disposal of the case.
(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or
intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.
(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates
without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12501 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025
5/5cancelled.
(v) The court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and, in case, at any stage, it is found
that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in
terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this
purpose or in the name of verification.
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U T