Sweta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78298 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2135 Year-2023 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.

Sweta Devi W/o- Rupesh Kumar Ram R/o- Kali Pahadi, Chupui Khas, Koilyari, P.S.- Raniganj, Distt.- Vardhman (W.B.) 2.

Sunita Devi W/o- Rajendar Bari R/o- RAjbhar Tola, Barlauni, P.S.- Dagarua, Distt.- Purnia 3.

Sita Devi W/o- Late Hare Ram Prasad R/o- Laliyahi, At present, R/oBheriya Rahika, Behind Polytechnique College, P.S.- Katihar Muffasil, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Anuradha Devi W/o- Sanjay Kumar R/o- Mirchaibari, Near Library, P.S.- Katihar Sahayak, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Brajendra Nath Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 2135 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 417, 418, 504, 420, 506 and 149 of the I.P.C.

3. As per complaint case, complainant got executed the sale deed in her favour in respect to a land standing in the name of late Monaka Devi by her five daughters, namely,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78298 of 2025(2) dt.19-11-2025 2/3 Vidita, Sunita, Sweta, Seela and Priyanka. On 23.05.2017, on the alleged land accused Shahnawaz Khan was running a garage on rent, for which complainant had asked him several times to make new agreement for rent, to which he denied on one pretext of other. It is further alleged that after a month, on 23.06.2023 accused Shahnawaz got executed the sale deed in his favour for the same land by forgery by showing only three daughters of late Monaka Devi who are Sita, Sweta and Sunita in connivance with accused Rajendra and Rupesh.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are quite innocent and they have committed no such type of offence/occurrence as alleged by the complainant in the present case. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case by the complainant due to local politics and ulterior motive of the complainant. Learned counsel further submits that there are general and omnibus allegations levelled against the petitioner of cheating and forgery. There is case and counter case between the parties and for the same occurrence, another complaint case is filed by the complainant Sita Devi (petitioner no. 3) i.e. C.A. Case No. 2232 of 2023.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

6. After hearing the argument of both the parties, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78298 of 2025(2) dt.19-11-2025 3/3 appears that there is bona fide land dispute between both the parties. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Katihar, in connection with Complaint Case No. 2135 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., with the condition that one of the bailors should be close relative of the petitioners.

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Ankit Kumar/- U T