Rajesh Shankar, J
1. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence
as alleged. As per the allegation, the complainant-opposite party no.2, who happened to be the Director of M/s. Durga Developer, Gopal Marketing
Complex, Argora, Ranchi, engaged in construction of multi-storeyed buildings, was in search of land in Ranchi Municipal Area. Knowing the said fact,
the accused persons including the petitioners approached the opposite party no.2 and placed photostat copies of the documents relating to land,
appertaining to Khata no.29, plot nos.1860, 1861, 1862, 1863 & 1864; Khata no.123, plot nos.54, 56, 57, 58 & 59; Khata no.157, plot no.1804; Khata
no.94, plot no.1761; and Khata no.53, plot no.1805, measuring total area of 8.32 acres, showing themselves to be owners of the same. It has further
been alleged that the opposite party no.2 got ready to purchase the said land and gave Rs.90.00 lakh to the accused persons for construction of
boundary wall, however, they neither constructed boundary wall nor handed over peaceful possession of the said land. It is further submitted that so
far as the petitioner no.1 is concerned, he had merely introduced co-accused- Bhola Gosai and Sanjay Kumar Gosai with the opposite party no.2. So
far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned, he was the witness of memorandum of agreement dated 3rd April, 2018. Co-accused- Sanjay Kumar Gosai
has already been granted bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class-XXX, Ranchi vide order dated 29th March, 2022 passed in Complaint
Case no.5509 of 2019. Another co-accused- Bhola Gosai has been granted regular bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20th
June, 2022 passed in B.A. No.308 of 2022. Hence, the petitioners may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
3. No one appears on behalf of the State as well as opposite party no.2. It was observed vide order dated 31st July, 2024 that if the counsel for the
opposite party no.2 did not appear on the next date fixed, the present anticipatory bail application would be decided on merit after hearing the learned
counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners, above
named, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, in event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks from today,
shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand), each, with two sureties of the like amount, each, to the
satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, in connection with Complaint Case no.5509 of 2019, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
