Md Alamgir Siddiqui @ Mohammad Alamgir Siddique @ Alamgir Siddiqui v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60416 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-588 Year-2024 Thana- BARHARIA District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.

Md Alamgir Siddiqui @ Mohammad Alamgir Siddique @ Alamgir Siddiqui Son of Late Md. Nazir Resident of Village - Tetahali, P.S. - Barhariya, District - Siwan at present residing at Barwa Kapanpura P.S. - Hathua,District - Gopalganj.

2.

Najrul Nesa Wife of Late Ali Imam Resident of Village - Tetahali, P.S. - Barhariya, District - Siwan.

3.

Nursuda Khatoon @Nursa Siddiqui@ Nursaba Khatoon Wife of Akbar Ali Resident of Village - Tetahali, P.S. - Barhariya, District - Siwan. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Prem Kumar Jha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner no.1 created a forged document of the land of informant's grand mother and sold the same to petitioner no.3. Petitioner no.2 is witness in the sale deed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute involved in this case is purely civil in nature. Petitioner no.3 is bonafide purchaser of land and after payment of full

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60416 of 2025(3) dt.23-09-2025 2/2 consideration money, he has purchased land from petitioner no.1. Petitioner no.2 is simply witness and is not the beneficiary of the alleged transaction. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.

6. Considering the accusation that petitioner no.1, without having rightful title and ownership, sold the land by creating forged documents, his prayer for bail is refused.

7. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, he is said to be witness and petitioner no.3 is fonafide purchaser of land, their prayer for bail is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within eight weeks from today, let petitioners no. 2 and 3, mentioned 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in Barhariya Police Station Case No. 588 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T