Ehtasham Ahmad vs The State Of Bihar on 9 May, 2025

Patna High Court – Orders

Ehtasham Ahmad vs The State Of Bihar on 9 May, 2025

Author: Satyavrat Verma

Bench: Satyavrat Verma

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4431 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2024 Thana- PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                         Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Ehtasham Ahmad Son of Ishtiyak Ahmad Resident of Chandbhati PS
                 -Dagarua District- Purnea

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Md. Firoz Alam son of Md. Abbas village- Sakrail, ps- Dagarua, Dist-
                 Purnea

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Md Fazle Karim
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Md. Fahimuddin
                                                Dr. Bidhu Ranjan
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   09-05-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf

of the complainant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149,

341, 323, 324, 384, 385, 420, 467, 468, 406, 504, 506 and 120B

of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the complainant

alleges that petitioner agreed to sell his land as detailed in the

FIR, accordingly an agreement for sale was entered in between

the complainant and the petitioner and the consideration of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4431 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025
2/3

land was fixed at Rs. 12 lakh, further the petitioner received an

amount of Rs. 10 lakh, thereafter when complainant went to the

house of petitioner with rest of the amount for getting the sale

deed executed, when petitioner abused and assaulted him and

even took Rs. 15,000/- by way of extortion.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

complainant. It is next submitted that no agreement for sale was

ever entered in between the petitioner and the complainant. It is

also submitted that the agreement for sale on which the

complainant is placing reliance, is a forged and fabricated

document and a specific statement to this effect has been made

at para 14 and 18 of the anticipatory bail application. It is

further submitted that petitioner had earlier instituted Dagrua

P.S. Case No. 32 of 2024 dated 18-1-2024 (Annexure-4) against

the complainant alleging that complainant cheated him based on

an agreement for sale of an amount of Rs. 9 lakh. It is next

submitted that since Dagrua P.S. Case No. 32 of 2024 dated 18-

1-2024 was instituted by the petitioner, as such the complainant

instituted the instant case in order to coerce the petitioner into

submission. It is also submitted that even presuming what has

been alleged is true without admitting then the complainant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4431 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025
3/3

ought to have approached the court of competent civil

jurisdiction for getting the sale deed executed in terms of the

agreement for sale, but then the complainant resorted to a

criminal proceeding. It is also submitted that had the

complainant approached the court of competent civil

jurisdiction, the petitioner would have raised his objection.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State along with learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposes the

prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court

within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-

(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case

is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case

No. 189 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under

Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)
SUMIT/-

U     T