IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74359 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2025 Thana- NOKHA District- Rohtas ======================================================

Ravi Ranjan Pratap Maurya S/O Ramji Singh Resident of Village- Samahuta, PS- Sanjhauli, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Dhanji Choudhary, S/O Basant Choudhary R/O Village and Post- Nokha, Ward No. 16, District0 Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Nirmala Kumari, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Siddharth Harsh, learned counsel for the petitioner duly assisted by Ms. Nandini, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tiwary representing the informant as also the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Nokha P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025 for the offence under sections 323, 341, 342, 379, 406, 420 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 20.01.2025 by the informant, Dhanji Chaudhary.

3. As per the prosecution story, the petitioner and unknown persons entered the clinic and after abuse/assault, took away Rs. 50,000/- and a gold chain. The allegation is that an advance of Rs. 5,00,000/- was paid by the informant towards purchase of the land in the year 2023 and an agreement to sale was also made but the accused persons fraudulently took away Rs. 5,00,000/- advance and neither returned the amount nor registered the land in favour of the informant. This led to the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is purely a civil dispute and only to implicate, months later, the FIR. There is no injury on record and as the land could not be transferred for the reasons best known to the parties, he is ready to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- in installment as follows:

“(i) shall be paying Rs. 1,50,000/- at the time of execution of bail bond;

(ii) Rs. 1,00,000/-by 1^st of March, 2026 and;

(iii) Rs. 50,000/- by 1^st of April, 2026.”

5. Learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer submitting that after agreement, it is the fault on the part of the petitioner which led to the non-execution of sale deed, he wanted to usurp the amount and this also followed the abuse/assault. He, however, submits that when the petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 3,00,000/-, reserving his right to pursue the present case, he do not oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the submission of the parties and the undertaking of the petitioner that he is ready to pay the amount in installment, as recorded above, and further assured that they shall be sitting over the table and if any more amount needs to be cleared, the same shall be paid, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Nokha P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document (Aadhaar Card/Voter I.D. Card/Driving License/Pan Card) to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(iv) the petitioner shall desi