Patna High CourtCR. MISC./42590/2026bail granted

Ramlal Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2026-07-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42590 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-355 Year-2024 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Ramlal Sah S/o Baidhnath Sah R/o Village- Amodei Tola, Raghunathpur, P.S - Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran 2.

Sita Ram Sah S/o Baidhnath Sah R/o Village- Amodei Tola, Raghunathpur, P.S - Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran 3.

Ram Narayan Prasad S/o Chandrika Sah R/o Village- Amodei Tola, Raghunathpur, P.S - Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Suresh Kumar S/o Ram Naresh Prasad R/o - Chhota Pureuwa, P.S - Raxaul, District - East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2026 Heard Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 355 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 120(B), 504 and 506 of the I.P.C.

3. According to prosecution case, the petitioners and the complainant are claiming the ownership over the same piece of land based on different sale deed. The complainant alleged

2/4 that all the accused persons are threatening him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the complaint petition is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not committed any offences as alleged in the complaint petition. He further submits that petitioners have sold the land in question to one Saddam Hussain and complainant has alleged in the complaint petition that petitioners have no legal right over the land in question and for the same set of land, the complainant has filed a Title Suit No.320 of 2024, which is pending for consideration before competent Court of law and co-accused, Md. Saddam Hussain has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 73195 of 2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that petitioners have clean antecedent and for the same set of land a Title Suit No.320 of 2024 is pending for consideration and one of the co-accused has been granted the

3/4 privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released 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 learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Complaint Case No. 355 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i.

Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners 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 petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their

4/4 criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) Suruchi/- U T