Patna High Court

Rajkumar MandalversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and surety conditions, under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajkumar Mandal, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a criminal case (Bath P.S. Case No. 120 of 2024) alleging offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged forgery and wrongful identification in a sale deed. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was involved in the forgery, while his counsel argued that he was merely an identifier with no specific overt act or criminal antecedent, and that no cheating or dishonest inducement could be ascribed to him. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner was implicated. The Court examined whether the allegations against the petitioner were specific enough to deny bail and considered the provisions of Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Finding that the petitioner’s role was limited to identification and that the allegations were general, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs. 15,000 and two sureties, with conditions as prescribed.

Issues considered

What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to the petitioner?
Whether the petitioner can be held liable for offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the IPC based on the alleged identification role?
Whether the prosecution’s allegations constitute a specific overt act sufficient to deny bail?

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

anticipatory bail
forgery
identification
Indian Penal Code
Section 482
Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
bail conditions
criminal law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17139 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2024 Thana- BATH District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Rajkumar Mandal S/O Late Naresh Mandal Resident Of Village- Nayagaon,
                 P.s.- Bath, Dist.- Bhagalpur



                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus

                 The State of Bihar


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Avanindra Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Bath P.S. Case No. 120 of 2024 instituted for the offences

                   under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused

                   persons allegedly committed forgery in Kevala No. 5460 dated

                   05.04.2023 and created a sale deed on that basis. It is further

                   alleged that Raj Kumar Mandal (petitioner) wrongly identified

                   the parties in the said document.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17139 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                            2/3




                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

          Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and

          omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No

          specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. Learned

          counsel further submitted that there is no allegation of cheating

          and dishonestly inducing the delivery of the property against the

          petitioner and hence, petitioner cannot be held responsible for

          offence under Section 420 of the IPC. Learned counsel further

          submitted that the only role of the petitioner is of identifier. It

          has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner

          has no criminal antecedent.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, let the petitioner above named, in the event of

          arrest/surrender before the learned Court below within a period

          of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          Court below/concerned Court               in connection with Bath P.S.

          Case No. 120 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17139 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha

                     Sanhita, 2023.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…