Hira Sah @ Heera Prasad Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18832 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2569 Year-2012 Thana- PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPurnia ====================================================== Hira Sah @ Heera Prasad Sah Son of Kant Lal Sah @ Sri Kant Lal Sah Resident of Village- Rahi Chatanma, P.S.- Bihariganj, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Lal Bahadur Singh Son of Indeshwari Prasad Singh Resident of Village - Karmanchak, P.S. - Bhawanipur, District - Purnea ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Subesh Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025

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, 465, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that the property in dispute came in his share in partition and his cousin brother based on a forged sale deed allegedly executed by father of the complainant, is in possession of the property, when his father never executed any sale deed with respect to the property in dispute.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18832 of 2025(3) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 complainant based on the ground that he is witness on the sale deed executed by the father of the complainant in favour of his cousin brother. It is further submitted that if the complainant is aggrieved by the fact that the sale deed is forged and fabricated in that event the complainant ought to have moved before a Court of competent civil jurisdiction for getting the sale deed cancelled instead of instituting the instant criminal case.

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, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case No. 2569 of 2012 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T