PRADEEP KUMAR, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the State as also learned Counsel for the informant.
(2.) PETITIONER is an accused in a case registered Under Section 406, 420 of the I.P.C. in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 36 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 384 of 2011 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that as per the F.I.R the allegation against the Petitioner is that Petitioner made a verbal agreement with Sunil Tiwary for the sale of his lands about 11.5 katthas at M.S. Plot No. 1072 ward No. 3, mohalla -Uppar Bazar, area between Makey Road and Nil Ratan Street. The sale was fixed at Rs. 1,30,00,000/ -. It is alleged that the Petitioner stated that there are other co -sharers of the property and he has informed all the co -sharers from telephone and believing him on 20.1.2004 and 28.7.2004, by cash and cheque the informant paid Rs. 23 lakh as advance to the accused -Petitioner. It is further stated that subsequently, also on the request of the Petitioner that he has to give money to his co -sharer, money was given in advance to the tune of Rs. 97,87,000/ -till 16.4.2006. The Petitioner -accused assured the informant that after taking power of attorney from all the co -sharer he will execute the sale deed on payment of rest of the money, but since time was passing out and the accused failed to execute the sale deed, informant filed Title Suit No. 264 of 2010 stating all the things. It is alleged that the Defendant No. 7 to 11, who are co -sharer filed their written statement on 18.5.2010 and they stated that they have got No. knowledge about the agreement and No. money had been paid to them. Then the informant asked for receipt from the accused -Petitioner with regard to the money paid to his co -sharer to which Petitioner refused to give any such receiving and for the first time informant came to know that accused - Petitioner has cheated him and he has taken entire some of Rs. 97,87,000/ -in the name of giving to his co -sharer and hence, lodged this F.I.R.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the dispute is only civil in nature, since admittedly the Petitioner has filed T.S. No. 264 of 2010 before filing of this F.I.R. It is further submitted that as per the agreement annexed with the F.I.R it is clear that if the agreement will be canceled account will be verified and advance taken be refunded with interest. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that it will appear from the averments made in para 14 and 15 of the Title suit filed by the informant that with the concurrence of the female co -sharer and other co -sharer, Defendant No. 1 to 4, 7 to 11 and 13 to 16 jointly and unanimously decided to sale the suit property to salable buyers, hence there is No. concealment from the co -sharer and there is No. question of cheating the informant. In that view of the matter, Petitioner may be enlarge on bail.;