Dr Sahnaz Saheen v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4335 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2023 Thana- BANKA District- Banka ====================================================== Dr Sahnaz Saheen Wife of Armanuddin R/O - 173/C, Chand Memorial Hospital Complex, Patliputra Colony, Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Harshit Griyaghey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Upendra Kumar, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-02-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 385 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a women and the informant alleges that the petitioner executed a sale deed dated 28.01.2023 with respect to the land pertaining to Khata No. 64, Khesra No. 514(Ga), area 6 decimals for an amount of Rs.42 lakhs. Further, the informant on lease also took 6 decimals of land for twenty-five years after paying Rs.1 lakh but when the informant started his construction work over his purchased and the leased land, he was stopped by the petitioner on the pretext that he has commenced work on the wrong plot.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4335 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2025 2/3 On inquiry, it transpired that in Khesra No. 514(Ga), there is only 4.5 decimals of land, as such, the sale deed ought to have been executed with respect to land pertaining to Khesra No. 514 (Ka) and the land pertaining to lease deed appertained to Khata No. 514(Kha) which only had 1 decimal of land when the lease deed ought to have been with respect to land pertaining to Khata No. 514(Ga), thus, alleges that he was cheated by the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that the dispute was purely civil to which a criminal colour has been given. It is next submitted that no doubt, a mistake was committed while executing the sale deed dated 28.01.2023 but then there is provision in law for getting the sale deed rectified and, accordingly, rectification deed was executed on 22.05.2023 as would manifest from Annexure-3 to the anticipatory bail application. It is, thus, submitted that grievance of the informant stands redressed.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4335 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2025 3/3 event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Banka P.S. Case No. 165 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. However, the informant shall be at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner if it is found that the rectification deed annexed as Annexure-3 in the instant anticipatory bail application is not a genuine document.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T