Patna High Court
Sheela Kumari @ Kumari SheelaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions imposed.
Summary
The petitioner, Sheela Kumari, was implicated in a complaint (Case No. 1830 of 2021) alleging criminal conspiracy to fraudulently execute a sale deed over a parking space, invoking IPC sections 420, 468 and 34. She contended that she is merely the daughter‑in‑law of the true landowner, Shanti Devi, and that the dispute is a civil matter between the developer and the owner, with the land in question belonging to her mother as per revenue records. The petitioner asserted a clean antecedent and argued that the criminal charges were fabricated to harass her. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s clean record, and the civil character of the underlying dispute, the Court granted anticipatory bail, directing that if she is arrested within eight weeks she may be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite allegations under IPC sections 420, 468 and 34.
- Whether the matter is essentially a civil dispute and thus not warranting criminal prosecution.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 420, 468
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal conspiracy
- IPC 420
- IPC 468
- IPC 34
- civil dispute
- land sale
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1067 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1830 Year-2021 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Sheela Kumari @ Kumari Sheela W/O Subhash Kumar Singh @ Subhash
Kumar R/O Shanti Apartment, Dusadhi Pakri, P.S- Kankarbagh, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. M/S Krishna Construction Partnership Firm through Sri Maninder Nath
Mishra S/O Late Shyam Nath Mishra R/O P.C Colony Lohia Nagar, P.S-
Kankarbagh, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Riya Raj, Advocate
Mr. Amarshakti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, Addl. Public Prosecutor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and
the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the complaint case, the accused persons,
including this petitioner, in criminal conspiracy, dishonestly
executed sale deed by claiming right and title over the parking
space of the complainant and sold the same.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner is the only daughter-in-law of the actual owner of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1067 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
the land in question, i.e. Shanti Devi and complainant is the
developer. The land in question is not related to the complainant
rather it is the complainant who in order to capture whole land
of the petitioner falsely implicated her in the present case. It is
further submitted that from land revenue receipts of the year
2008 and 2024 it is crystal clear that portion measuring 24.83
decimal on which the agreement has been executed and the land
left in question measuring 7.73 decimal belongs to Shanti Devi.
Moreover, dispute involves sale and purchase of land between
developer and owner of the land which is purely civil in nature
and has been given colour of criminality only with a view to
harass the petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
the bail application.
6. Considering backdrop of the case, nature of
accusation and clean antecedent, this anticipatory bail is allowed
and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event
of her arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of
eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC-XII, Patna in
connection with Complaint Case No. 1830 of 2021, subject to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1067 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…