IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17312 of 2010 HARI NARAIN RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 25.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State and for the Opposite Party No. 2, complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that as per the allegations themselves the petitioner had met the opposite party no. 2 more than once at the stage of negotiation. He was therefore identified to the complainant. If any imposter had appeared at the time of registration represented himself to be the petitioner, it was for the opposite party no. 2 to object at that stage. It is next submitted that the elder son of the petitioner has gone in collusion with the complainant with regard to the lands in question for which the petitioner has filed a complaint case No. 1585 C of 2008 against his elder son and the opposite party no. 2 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran and in which cognizance has been taken against the accused. Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that the petitioner misrepresented his 2 status as the uncle. He however is not in a position to controvert the statement in the complaint of having met the petitioner more than once at the stage of negotiation and submits lack of knowledge with regard to the complaint case filed by the petitioner against his elder son and the opposite party no. 2. The provisional bail granted to the petitioner in Trial No. 1760 of 2010 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1262 C of 2008, pending before the S.D.J.M., Bettiah, West Champaran is hereby confirmed. Let a copy of this order be communicated through FAX to the Court of the S.D.J.M., Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Trial No. 1760 of 2010 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1262 C of 2008, at the cost of the petitioner. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)