Praveen Kumar @ Praveen Kumar Mandal @ Shravan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84595 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2023 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna ====================================================== Praveen Kumar @ Praveen Kumar Mandal @ Shravan Kumar S/O Late Ramchandar Mandal Resident of village and P.O- Barhara, P.S- Nadi Thana, District- Supaul (Bihar),Pin- 847452 bearing Aadhar No.- 4013 5555 6640 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Chandrashekhar Azad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 05-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 305 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that few persons including the petitioner had impersonated her son, namely, Nishant Kumar and had sold her ancestral land by way of forged sale deed. It has further been alleged that when the informant visited the registry
2/4 office she found that one Praveen Kumar @ Shravan Kumar (the petitioner) had impersonated himself as her son and registered her land in the name of one Pranav Kumar.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the money received in lieu of the sale of the land was received in the account of petitioner which was transferred by Pranav Kumar. However, upon knowledge of the entire facts, F.I.R against the petitioner and others were filed and out of the total amount of Rs. 1,28,00,000/-, Rs. 73,00,000/- was paid back by the petitioner in the account of Pranav Kumar and the remaining Rs. 55,00,000/- was also returned by the co-accused, Dharmendra Kumar, who was acting as the mediator in the transaction and was also a witness of the sale deed. It has been submitted that no loss has occurred to the informant and the amount which was received by the accused persons has already been returned to Pranav Kumar. It has also been submitted that the informant has also filed a title suit being 157 of 2023 to declare the sale deed no. 18590 dated 14.12.2022 as null and void.
5. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that the money has been returned to Pranav Kumar and a similarly situated co-accused, namely, Dharmendra Kumar has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31869 of 2025, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 305 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative and the other shall be local resident. (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
4/4 nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (v) The learned 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 acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) aditya/- U T