Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.6039 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Surya Bansi Singh @ Mathura Singh S/O Late Ambika Singh Vill Lakipur, P.S.Gaurichak, Distt-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 08-02-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with a case in which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] . It is alleged that the complainant entered into an agreement for sale of land with the petitioner and has advanced rupees one lakh for the same. When the complainant arranged the remaining amount and asked the petitioner for execution of sale deed, the petitioner neither executed the sale deed nor returned the amount paid earlier. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the law laid down by the apex court in the case of Murari Lal Gupta Vs. Gopi Singh since reported in (2005)13 SCC 699 no Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6039 of 2012 (2) dt.08-02-2012 2 offence under section 420 and/or any other provision would be made out in the back ground of the allegation made in the case. It is also submitted that for the said dispute Title Suit No.326 of 2010 has already been filed and is pending adjudication. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case let the petitioner named above, in the event of arrest or surrender, 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 Sri R. Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, Patna City, Patna in connection with Complaint Case No.777(C) of 2010 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also subject to the condition that (i) both the bailors will be close relative of the petitioner who will give separate affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority, (iii) that he shall remain present before the court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If he wants to remain absent, then he shall take prior permission of the court and in case of compelling and unavoidable circumstance for remaining absent, Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6039 of 2012 (2) dt.08-02-2012 3 he shall immediately inform the court and request that he may be permitted to be present through the counsel and (iv) that liberty is given to the complainant/State to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioner violates any of the conditions imposed by this court. Md.S./- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 420

Statute Text:
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Cheating and there by dishonestly inducing delivery of property, or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.