Bharat Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24576 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - SIKRAHANA District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1 .
Bharat Sah son of Late Badri Sah Resident of Village - Mirpur, Police Station - Chiraiya, District - East Champaran 2.
Hirdyalal Sah @ Hidryal Sah Son of Late Biltu Sah Village- Mirpur PsChiraiya, Dist- East Champaran 3 .
Suman Kumar (Katib) @ Suman Kumar son of Late Ravindra Prasad village- Ruphara, ps- Sikarganj, Dist- East Champaran At P/A- At Katib Registry Office, Dhaka, East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1 .
The State of Bihar 2.
Sumitra Devi wife of Late Bigan Sah village- Mirpur, Ps- Chiraiya, DistEast Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar , Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State .
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 420, 467, 468 , 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code .
3 . As per the prosecution case , complainant namely , Sumitra Devi who was a widow lady has two daughters and on 30.12.2021 when she became ill, then her daughter namely Puja Kumari, son-in -law Rakesh Kumar and this petitioner namely,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24576 of 2025(3) dt.29-07-2025 2/3 Bharat Sah in connivance with other co-accused persons fraudulently got executed the land of complainant through sale deed.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that petitioner No. 1 has falsely been implicated in this case because he happens to be father of co-accused Rakesh Kumar. It is further submitted that petitioner No. 2 is identifier to the sale deed and petitioner No. 3 is deed writer and they have got no concern with the alleged occurrence . Petitioners are not the beneficiaries of the alleged sale deed. As a matter of fact, land in question was registered in the name of other co-accused persons. Moreover, the dispute involved in this case is with regard to sale and purchase of land for which informant has got remedy before Court below . Petitioners claim clean antecedent. 5 . Learned counsel for the State oppose the bail petition .
6 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within eight weeks from today, let the petitioners, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub- Division Judicial Magistrate Sikrahana
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24576 of 2025(3) dt.29-07-2025 3/3 at Dhaka District- East Champaran in connection with Complaint Case No. 307 of 2023 subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure . (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T