AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 420/406/467/468/471/323/506/34/120(B) IPC have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and have not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint leading to lodging of the F.I.R under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Both the petitioners are the witnesses to the sale deed No. 9658/7658 dated 09.12.2011. Even on perusal of the complaint, it would be evident that the main allegation is against co-accused Mahdeb Singh and Durga Charan Singh, who happen to be the vendor and purchaser respectively of the land in question. Hence, the petitioners may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned A.P.P opposes the petitioners' prayer for anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the above named two petitioners are directed to surrender before the concerned Court below within a period of four weeks. If they surrender before the Court below within the aforesaid period, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (twenty thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur in connection with Patamda P.S. Case No. 16/2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.