Karu Yadav @ Karu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 16863 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2023 Thana- Kavaiya District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Karu Yadav @ Karu Kumar Son of Gulten Yadav Resident of Mohalla- Kiul Basti, Gandhi Tola Ward No. 17, P.S.- Kabiya, District- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Suresh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026 Heard Mr.Suresh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 12.01.2026 in connection with Kabaiya P.S. Case No. 496 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 02.07.2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406,420,467,468/34 of IPC.
3. Prosecution came in brief, is that the petitioner got executed the sale deed no. 410 in favour of Rameshwar Mahto on the consideration amount of Rs. 9,40,000/- and through this sale-deed the ancestral land of Informant was sold and in that sale deed it was falsely written that his grand father namely Etwari Gope got the same land from the
2/4 informant's ancestor Janki Dhanuk vide Deed No. 4521 dated 20.05.1929.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. In fact the co-accused person, namely, Malhu Yadav has executed the sale deed in favour of Rameshwar Mahto. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grand father of Malhu Yadav, namely, Etwari Gope purchased the said land through registered Sale Deed No.4521 dated 20.05.
3/4 order dated 27.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 58937 of 2025 and the petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2026.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, petitioner has clean antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Lakhisarai in connection with Kabaiya P.S. Case No. 496 of 2023, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed
4/4 his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T