Abdul Haque v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76628 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Abdul Haque S/O Late Inayat Hussain Resident of Village- Ramgarhwa Bajar, P.S- Ramgarhwa, Distt.- East Champaran, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anshul, Sr. Advocate.

Ms. Nazia Shabah, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-11-2025

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 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is aged about 72 years and the informant alleges that petitioner and his wife filed Civil Case No.3/2012 against the informant with respect to a piece of land at Ramgarhwa market, further the petitioner and his wife on 17.10.2017 filed an application for marking the order of the SDM in Case No.39M/2011 with regard to 144 Cr.P.C. proceeding, along with list of documents as exhibit,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76628 of 2025(2) dt.27-11-2025 2/3 further from perusal of the filed documents, it became clear that fraud has been committed in making the order sheet of Case No.39M/2011, further the said case was brought to the notice of the learned Munsif, who found the allegations prima facie correct and directed for instituting Misc. Case No.2/2019 against the plaintiff of Civil Case No.3/2012 by an order dated 11.03.2019, thereafter an inquiry started and a document submitted by the petitioner for marking exhibit was found doubtful and suspicious, thus was not marked as exhibit for the purposes of evidence.

4. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant in sum and substance alleges that the order which the petitioner as plaintiff intended to get it exhibited for the purposes of deciding the Civil dispute was found to be suspicious and doubtful as such the learned Munsif did not mark the said order as exhibit for the purposes of evidence. It is submitted that it is not the case of the informant that the document was found forged and fabricated rather the learned Munsif found the document suspicious but then no inquiry with regard to genuineness of the document was carried

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76628 of 2025(2) dt.27-11-2025 3/3 out. It is further submitted that the parties have compromised even. It is next submitted that petitioner retired as a Headmaster of a government school with blemish-less service record. It is also submitted that no person would intentionally file any document knowing it to be forged and fabricated.

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 Court below 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 Ramgarhwa P.S. Case No.82/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T