Patna High Court – Orders
Dhanpati Sharma Mainali vs The State Of Bihar on 17 December, 2024
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35161 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2020 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Dhanpati Sharma Mainali son of Late Vishnu Prasad Mainali, Resident of
Village- Raja Bazar PS- Motihari Town Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Suresh Prasad S/o- Late Jagarnath Sah R/o Village- Chainpur, P.S.-
Chhauradano, District- East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umeshanand Pandit, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 17-12-2024
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with
Turkauliya (Raghunathpur O.P.) P.S.Case No.151 of 2020,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406,
467, 468 & 471/34of the Indian Penal Code.
3. In the light of Bimla Tiwari vs. State of Bihar &
Ors. case [SLP (Crl.) Nos. 834-835 of 2023], the petitioner
may seek bail considering the matter to be purely civil in nature
on the very fact that the entire consideration amount has been
paid in cash, however, there is restriction by the Ministry of
Finance, Government of India by making amendment in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35161 of 2023(6) dt.17-12-2024
2/3
Income Tax Act in the year, 2016 that the consideration amount,
in view of the sale of land, can only be made by means of any
instrument either online transfer from the Account or by means
of cheque or draft or any other instrument.
4. I find that no specific statement has been made in
the counter affidavit about the means of transaction, as well as,
at the time of registration of the land, the informant had not
raised any objection before the Registrar. The Registrar is not
authorized under the Registration Act to go into the veracity of
the dispute as has been alleged in the FIR. The parties have
remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
5. Considering the admissions made on behalf of
O.P.No.2 in respect of his claim that the land, in dispute, is
belonging to him, which has been settled by the King of Nepal.
6. In view of the pleadings made in the bail
application and the counter affidavit, I find that the parties have
remedy before the appropriate civil court for redressal of their
grievance.
7. I find no merit in the present bail application in
view of the disputed question of fact, as well as, certain
certificate, which has been issued in favour of the O.P.no.2.
8. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35161 of 2023(6) dt.17-12-2024
3/3
case, the documents are required to be verified by the Additional
Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department,
Government of Bihar by calling upon both the parties and,
thereafter, submit his report before the learned district court and
the learned district court is directed to exercise its power under
Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. to consider the bail application of the
petitioner on the basis of the materials available on the record
and the report submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary,
Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar.
9. With the above observation/direction, the present
bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U