JAYA ROY, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
(2.) THE petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 467/468/471/120B and 506 of the I.P.C. The prosecution case as alleged in the complaint petition dated 24.9.2011, filed by one Shatrughan Prasad Singh, in brief is that one Chandi Prasad Mahato who is the son and legal heir of Late Bhusiya Mahatain recorded tenant of the land within Mouza No. 8, Saraidhella Khata No.102 situated at Murli Nagar and the complainant is the Power of attorney holder of said Chandi Prasad Mahato and Nanda Devi, vide registered Power of Attorney dated 5.10.2007. It is further alleged that the petitioner creating nuisance on the land of said Bhusia Mahatain by fictitious claim and by using criminal force to grab the land through Dungia Mahatain and after knowing about the aforesaid Power of Attorney in favour of the complainant, the petitioner and others demanded Rangdari of Rs.4,00,000/ -from the complainant for which the complainant lodged the present case i.e. C.P. Case No. 1827 of 2011 under Sections 120B/167/467/468/471/506 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and three others which was pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. It is further alleged in the complain petition that in this connection one C.P. Case No. 1655/09 was filed earlier under Sections 387/419/420/467/468/471/342/506 and 120B of I.P.C. against the said accused person Padan Lochan Mahto and five other. It is further alleged in C.P. Case No. 1827/2011 that Budhu Mahto the main recorded tenant died leaving behind only daughter Bhusia Mahatain only legal heir of his property and Chandi Prasad Mahto and Nanda Devi are son and daughter of said Bhusia Mahatain. Complain petition further revils that order sheet dated 11.10.90 in mutation case No. 6(11)90 -91 it is very clear that Jamabandi record was opened in sole name of Bhusia Mahtain and on that time father of the petitioner Hulash Mahto became son of Late Bhusia Mahatain and sold the land of Khata No.102. In another order sheet dated 6.7.90 in mutation case No. 486 -11/1990 -91 it is clear that Late Hulash Mahto father of the petitioner became son of Late Budhu Mahto (original Recorded tenant) belonging to Khata No. 102 Plot No. 2808. Main allegation in the complain petition about the petitioner is that he is creating nuisance and using criminal force and disturbing possession of the complaint and demanded Rs.4,00,000/ -( Four Lakhs) from the complaint. It is further alleged that on 10.9.11 complainant and witnesses went to the house of the accused No. 1 Dubai @ Durai Murmu ( Halka Karamchari Dhanbad) at 9 A.M. The petitioner was present there the complainant asked about the foul game played by them both the persons became furious, and assaulted the complaint and threaten to take away his life.
(3.) THE prosecution case is further is that earlier the complainant of the instant case had lodged another complaint case before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad which was registered as Com Case No. 1655 of 2009 under Sections 387/419/420/467/468/471/342/506 and 120B of I.P.C.;