DAYANAND KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is in custody in connection with the case registered under Sections 406/420/468/471/34 IPC.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; the allegation is that the land sold to the informant was disputed one and that the petitioner, who happens to be a broker of the said land, cheated the petitioner; the said allegation is wholly false and concocted; however, in order to satisfy the informant, the petitioner has already returned the entire consideration amount paid by the informant; the petitioner is a local permanent resident and there is no chance of his absconding.

(3.) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the C.J.M, Ranchi in connection with Dhurwa (Tupudana) P. S. Case No. 228/09, corresponding to G. R. No. 5162/09.