Shriman NarayanversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18960 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Shriman Narayan S/O Nirmal Singh @ Nirmal Kumar Sharma R/O Village-
                 Kinari, P.S.- Salarpur, P.S.- Jahanabad, Dist.- Jehanabad
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Shashi Shekhar Saroj S/O Late Radhaballabh Rakesh R/O Village- Kinari,
                  P.O.- Salarpur, P.S.- Jahanabad, Dist.- Jehanabad
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ajay Kumar Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of

                   the informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2),

                   318(4) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges

                   that on 14.02.2025, he entered into an agreement for sale with

                   Rajesh for purchasing a piece of land at the instance of the

                   petitioner, the money was paid in cash and by bank transfer, but

                   in the sale deed the amount entered was less than what was

                   given, the sale deed recorded incorrect boundaries, after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18960 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                            2/3




          execution of the sale deed boundary was constructed, but after

          four years the boundary was demolished on the pretext that

          boundary was incorrect, thus, alleges that cheating was resorted

          to by the accused persons and earlier petitioner in similar

          manner had cheated Ramakant Pandey.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is further submitted that since Rajesh was known

          to the petitioner and Rajesh intended to sell a piece of land, as

          such, petitioner introduced the informant to Rajesh and

          thereafter some amount was credited in the account of the

          petitioner by the informant for giving to Rajesh and Rajesh after

          receiving the amount executed the sale deed in favour of the

          informant. It is next submitted that the informant does not

          dispute the sale of land but then alleges that the boundaries in

          the sale deed were incorrectly recorded and, thus, after four

          years, the accused persons, excluding the petitioner, came and

          demolished the boundary wall. It is also submitted that it was

          not the petitioner who was involved in demolition of the

          boundary wall of the informant over his purchased land.

                       5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

          and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18960 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but

                     then are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned

                     counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner

                     merely introduced the informant with Rajesh who intended to

                     sell a piece of land and Rajesh after receiving the entire

                     consideration executed the sale deed and the petitioner cannot

                     be faulted if the boundary in the sale deed was incorrectly

                     recorded.

                                  6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, let

                     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 Phulwari Sharif

                     (Janipur) P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025, subject to the conditions as

                     laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the

                     B.N.S.S.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T