IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20744 of 2011 Nagendra Behary Saran & Ors. Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr. ----------- 2 04.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite parties. Petitioners, Nagendra Behary Saran, Amrendra Behary Saran and Girija Devi @ Girijapati Devi are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.1992(c) of 2008 wherein cognizance has been taken under Section 420 of the I.P.C. Akhoury Sanjay Kumar filed complaint petition disclosing therein that contrary to the final decree prepared in accordance with the judgment of the Hon’ble Court which was contested amongst the forefather of respective parties accused petitioner nos. 1 and 2 conspired where under accused petitioner no.1 along with witness no.4 executed a sale deed which was in name of accused petition no.3 purchased by her husband over which, accused petitioner no.2 stood as a witness. Contention on behalf of the petitioners are of innocence and false implication to malign their prestige. Further submitted that in spite of having a final decree prepared with regard to the properties held by joint family of both the parties, it was never acted upon and that happens to be reason behind preparation of Khatiyan during survey 2 operation according to factual possession. (Annexure-1) Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the subsequent sale deeds executed by the respective parties will further strengthen the fact that they have given a go by to the final decree and in the aforesaid background submitted that the present document which happens to be Annexure-5 cannot be said to be illegal because of the fact that the survey plot numbers enumerated therein happens to be in name of petitioners during survey operation along with others. With regard to petitioner no.3, it has specifically been submitted that she happens to be a name lady in whose name document stood at the instance of her husband who purchase it after paying consideration money. It has also been submitted that so far petitioner no.2 is concerned he simply stood as a witness over the document. It has also been submitted that petitioner no.2 happens to be an advocate practicing at the Hon’ble Court. Although, it happens to be a case listed at later part of the list, but as the marriage of son petitioner no.2 is scheduled and for that the other ceremony are going to be performed from 5.7.2011, therefore, the matter has been heard on priority basis. On the other hand the learned Additional Public Prosecutor objected but fairly submitted that petitioner no.2 happens to be a practicing lawyer of the Hon’ble Court. Taking into account the nature of the allegation as well as being a complaint case, petitioners, namely, (1) 3 Nagendra Behary Saran, (2) Amrendra Behary Saran and (3) Girija Devi @ Girijapati Devi are directed to 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 learned S.D.J.M., Ara (Bhojpur) in connection with Complaint Case No. 1922(c) of 2008 within a fortnight in the event of his arrest / surrender in terms of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. PN ( Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)