Patna High Court
Kashinath MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Summary
The petitioner, Kashinath Mishra, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a criminal case (PS No. 314/2025) involving multiple offences under the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act, 2023. He alleged that the informant, a cousin, falsely implicated him over a land dispute where the informant claimed the petitioner sold land belonging to the informant’s family. The petitioner argued that the civil remedy of contesting the sale deed should have been pursued instead of filing an FIR. The State opposed the bail, but the court considered the petitioner's claim of false implication and the need to prevent undue arrest. Relying on Section 482(2) of the Act, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act, 2023.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute false implication warranting bail.
- Whether the civil remedy for land dispute precludes criminal prosecution.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- land dispute
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- Bihar law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14449 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-314 Year-2025 Thana- MAHARAJGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Kashinath Mishra Son of Late Dharmnath Mishra R/o Village - Takkitpur, P.S.
- Maharjganj, Dist. - Siwan(Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 31-03-2026 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 126(2),
115(2), 318(4), 336(3), 61(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS,
2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case, as would manifest from
the pleadings made in the supplementary affidavit and the
informant alleges that his co-villager, Ramdev on 03.06.2025
got a land registered from his cousin brother, the informant on
coming to know about the same reached the Registry office,
Maharajganj and requested his cousin brother (petitioner) not to
register the land, as the land was purchased by his father and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14449 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
uncle in the year 1962 from Brij Nandan and Raghunandan
Pathak, but informant was assaulted by petitioner and Ramdev
and was also threatened, thus, he fled from the place of
occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that informant and petitioner are
cousin brothers and from perusal of the allegation as alleged in
the FIR, it would manifest that the informant alleges that
petitioner sold the land of his father and uncle. It is further
submitted that the land belongs to the petitioner also and if
informant is aggrieved by the fact that the sale deed in favour of
Ramdev has been executed by the petitioner with respect to a
land which belongs to the informant, in that event the informant
ought to have moved a Court of competent civil jurisdiction for
getting the sale deed cancelled instead of instituting an FIR with
a view to coerce the petitioner into submission. It is also
submitted that had the informant moved before a Court of
competent civil jurisdiction for getting the sale deed cancelled,
the petitioner would have got an opportunity to rebut the claim
of the informant.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14449 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail application 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 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 Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 314 of 2025 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…