Shambhu Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75710 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-585 Year-2024 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== Shambhu Mehta aged about 53 years, S/o Late Bhagwan Mahto @ Bhagwan Das R/o vill - Abgila Near Manpur Block, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Priya Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-11-2025 Heard Mr. Priya Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 585 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 01.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed manipulation with the sale deed in the year 1959.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged occurrence. There is case and

2/4 counter case between the parties and as per allegation in the F.I.R., the petitioner has manipulated the document in question in the year 1959. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aged about 53 years and in 1959 perhaps he was not in existence how he can manipulate the document which was generated in the year 1959. Apart from the aforesaid, the petitioner has already filed a Title Suit bearing Title Suit No. 391 of 2023 for the same set of land which is still pending for consideration before the competent court of law. He further submits that co-accused person namely, Amit Kumar has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 14.07.2025 by the learned Court below itself.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that he is on bail in the pending matter.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is case and counter case between the parties and co-accused person has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the learned Court below itself, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender

3/4 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Vth, Gaya Ji in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 585 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

4/4 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) Ibrar//- U T