Patna High Court
Karu Yadav @ Karu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Karu Yadav was arrested in connection with a 2023 case alleging fraudulently executing a sale deed and was charged under IPC sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 34. He contended that he had a clean antecedent and that the alleged fraudulent deed was actually executed by his relative, Malhu Yadav, who had already been granted bail. The petitioner argued that the FIR was fabricated and that he was implicated merely because of his familial relationship. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the petitioner's clean record and the circumstances, granted bail on a cash bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 34 of the IPC.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420, 467, 468
Subjects
- bail
- fraud
- sale deed
- IPC
- criminal antecedent
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 16863 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2023 Thana- Kavaiya District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Karu Yadav @ Karu Kumar Son of Gulten Yadav Resident of Mohalla- Kiul
Basti, Gandhi Tola Ward No. 17, P.S.- Kabiya, District- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suresh Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-03-2026 Heard Mr.Suresh Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, learned A.P.P. for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
12.01.2026 in connection with Kabaiya P.S. Case No. 496 of
2023, F.I.R. dated 02.07.2023 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 406,420,467,468/34 of IPC.
3. Prosecution came in brief, is that the petitioner
got executed the sale deed no. 410 in favour of Rameshwar
Mahto on the consideration amount of Rs. 9,40,000/- and
through this sale-deed the ancestral land of Informant was
sold and in that sale deed it was falsely written that his grand
father namely Etwari Gope got the same land from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 16863 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
2/4
informant’s ancestor Janki Dhanuk vide Deed No. 4521 dated
20.05.1929.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The
allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the
FIR. In fact the co-accused person, namely, Malhu Yadav has
executed the sale deed in favour of Rameshwar Mahto.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grand
father of Malhu Yadav, namely, Etwari Gope purchased the
said land through registered Sale Deed No.4521 dated
20.05.1929 and on that basis, the name of the petitioner’s
grand father was mutated and Jamabandi was also transferred
in his name on this basis the co-accused person, namely,
Malhu Yadav has executed the sale deed in question and till
date no case has been filed by the informant for cancellation
of said sale deed and petitioner is neither the executor nor the
identifier of the said sale deed in question and he has been
made accused in the present case merely on the ground that he
is nephew of Malhu Yadav, and co-accused person, namely,
Malhu Yadav, who has executed the sale deed, has been
granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 16863 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
3/4
order dated 27.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 58937 of 2025
and the petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2026.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, petitioner has
clean antecedent, 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
learned C.J.M., Lakhisarai in connection with Kabaiya P.S.
Case No. 496 of 2023, with the following conditions:-
(I) 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/her absence on two consecutive dates
without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled
by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
(III) 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 16863 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
4/4
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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…