[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Geeta Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 23 July, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Sinha
Bench: Anil Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5518 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-614 Year-2021 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya
======================================================
Geeta Devi W/O Late Ravindra Singh Village- Kathar ward no. 1, P.S.-
Sherghati, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Niranjan Kumar S/O Awadhesh Singh Village- Kathar ward no. 1 P.S.-
Dobhi, District- Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prithivi Raj Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, App.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-07-2025
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail,
arises out of Sherghati Police Station Case No. 614 of 2021,
disclosing offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 387, 420, 467,
468, 471, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation, petitioner along with other
accused persons sold the land belonging to the informant’s wife
in fraudulent manner to another person in which the petitioner
played the main role with the co-accused Vishnu Kumar. The
petitioner along with other accused persons armed with
weapons, on 11.07.2021, arrived at the land of the informant,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5518 of 2025(4) dt.23-07-2025
2/4
assaulted him and snatched Rs. 25,000/- from his pocket and
threatened to kill the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner
alleged and her name has been implicated on the basis of dirty
village politics. The petitioner has filed a case against the
informant and others vide Sherghati P.S. Case No. 613 of 2021
dated 01.10.2021 for offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of
the I.P.C. and in retaliation, the present FIR has been lodged
against the petitioner. The petitioner and informant are co-
sharers and there is land dispute between them. The co-accused
person has been granted anticipatory bail by this court in Cr.
Misc. No. 19912 of 2024.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as
well as state and have perused the materials available on record
including the impugned order. It appears that the case of the
informant is that he purchased four decimals of land of Khata
No. 91, Plot No. 597 at village Kathar from Parmeshwar Singh
in the name of his wife Lovely Kumari on 29.05.2020. From
perusal of the impugned order, it appears that learned Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Sherghati, Gaya, have gone through
the sale deed and the order of mutation. As per the mutation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5518 of 2025(4) dt.23-07-2025
3/4
order, the land has been mutated in the name of wife of the
informant lovely Kumari on the basis of registered sale deed,
Jamabandi was also generated in the name of informant’s wife
Lovely Kumari. The petitioner filed a mutation appeal bearing
Appeal No. 19 of 2021-22 which was dismissed on 27.09.2021
As per agreement regarding the land of the informant, the co-
accused Vishnu Kumar received Rs. 15 lakhs from the purchaser
Brajesh Kumar on different dates regarding sale of four
decimals of land purchased by the informant’s wife Lovely
Kumari. Two decimals of land was sold on July 2021 and the
rest two decimals was sold in July 2022.
6. The petitioner had earlier moved anticipatory
bail before the learned Sessions Judge in ABP No. 1093 of 2022
which was rejected by learned A.D.J., 3rd, Gaya, on 08.07.2023.
Instead of challenging the order of rejection passed on
08.07.2023 or to surrender before the concerned court, the
petitioner again filed an anticipatory bail application before
learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sherghati, Gaya,
which has been rejected by the impugned order, dated
20.11.2024, arriving at the conclusion that the petitioner along
with others sold the land in the name of informant’s wife and has
played main role in cheating and forgery. The regular bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5518 of 2025(4) dt.23-07-2025
4/4
application of co-accused Vishnu Kumar has also been rejected
by the learned Court below in B.P. No. SH 16 of 2023 dated
21.01.2023.
7. Considering the aforesaid discussion and the fact
that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and the
petitioner failed to produce any document to show her prima
facie title on the subject land, accordingly, I am not inclined to
grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. This application is, accordingly, rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
HarshPandey/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link