Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46236/2025dismissed

Santosh Kumar Singh @ Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-23Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46236 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2024 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Singh @ Santosh Kumar S/o Late Chandra Shekhar Singh R/o Village- Shakti Nagar Bright Career School, PS- Maranga, Distt- Purnia ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Sanjeev Kumar S/o- Late Mathura Singh R/o- Vill-Dhundhuwa PS- Jandaha, Dist- Vaishali At present Madhubani PS- K. Hat District- Purnea ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Khushi Awadh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with K.Hat P.S. Case No. 348 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 166, 167, 420, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the allegation, the petitioner is alleged to have done forgery with the Government document i.e. Aadhar Card and the settlement order.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case.

5. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46236 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026 2/2 application of the petitioner and the relied upon the report of the SDO for showing that the aadhar card was forged by the petitioner. He further submits that in a title suit filed by the opposite party no. 2/informant, the petitioner has intervened and the title suit is proceeding but the pendency of title suit will not come in the way of the prosecution of the petitioner for forgery.

6. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the informant has also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Guru Granth Saheb Sthan Meerghat Vanaras Vs. Ved Prakash and Others reported in (2013) 7 SCC 622.

7. In view of the allegations of forgery levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U