Patna High Court
Hare Ram Ray Deepak @ Hareram Ray @ Deepak RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted because the dispute is essentially civil and the petitioners have clean antecedents, rendering criminal liability doubtful.
Summary
The petitioners sought anticipatory bail after the State filed a complaint alleging that they, along with others, forged a sale deed to illegally acquire land belonging to the complainant, invoking IPC sections 419, 420, 465, 466, 467 and 471. The petitioners contended that they were innocent, asserting that the land had been purchased by their ancestor in 1971 and that the present dispute was purely a civil title suit already pending before the court. The State and the complainant opposed the bail, arguing that criminal offences were involved. The court examined the nature of the dispute, the petitioners’ clean antecedents, and the fact that the matter was essentially a civil land‑title issue. Concluding that criminal liability was not evident, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2).
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a complaint case alleging forgery and cheating under the IPC.
- Whether the dispute over the sale deed is a civil matter that negates criminal liability.
- Whether the petitioners’ clean antecedents justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 419, 420, 465, 466, 467, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- cheating
- civil dispute
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1976 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2021 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - JHANJHARPUR
District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Hare Ram Ray Deepak @ Hareram Ray @ Deepak Ray Son of Late Siya
Ram Ray R/o Village - Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani.
2. Mahesh Kumar Roy @ Mahesh Ray Son of Sri Baleshwar Ray R/o Village -
Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani.
3. Suman Kumar Roy @ Suman Kumar Ray Son of Late Rajeshwar Rai R/o
Village - Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Heet Narayan Jha Son of Late Chandehwar Jha R/o Village - Jamailla, P.S. -
Rudrapur, District - Madhubani.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ramchandra Jha Raman, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a
complaint case registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 419, 420, 465, 466, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1976 of 2026(3) dt.13-03-2026
2/4
29.02.2020, all the named accused persons, including these
petitioners, under a conspiracy, forged a sale deed and got the
land appertaining to Old Khata No. 87, Old Khesra No. 957,
Rakba- 9 Dhur and Khesra No. 960, Rakha- 1 kattha and 3 dhur
and Khesra No. 962/1755, Rakba- 5 dhur and new Khesra No.
2486, which belongs to the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2
and his cousin brother, registered in their name from the
Registry Office, Jhanjharpur. It is further alleged that the sellers
of the said sale deed are Mahakant Roy, Shrikant Ray, Shiv Kant
Roy, Virankant Roy and Sanjay Kant Roy, however, in the
village Jamaila, no persons with such name exists. In the sale
deed, the mobile number of the seller is given as 62030829,
however, the said mobile number is registered in the name of
Petitioner No. 2. Thus, all the named accused persons, including
these petitioners, cheated the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2
and got his land executed in their name without any right, title
or possession.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, on 05.04.1971,
ancestor of these petitioners, namely Madhukar Roy, purchased
1 kattha 12 dhur land in question from one Mallik Roy through
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1976 of 2026(3) dt.13-03-2026
3/4
registered sale deed of gift, copy of which is Annexure-P2 to
this bail application. The remaining 1 kattha 12 dhur of land was
purchased by these petitioners from the descendants of late
Kalika Dutt who is brother of Mallik Roy. From bare perusal of
the genealogical table it will be evident that Kalika Dutt has two
sons, namely Fakir Rai and Kameshwar Rai. Fakir Rai died
issueless and thus, his entire share ended up with Kameshwar
Rai. Kameshwar Rai has five sons, namely Mahakant Roy,
Shrikant Ray, Shiv Kant Roy, Vishnukant Roy and Kant Lal
Roy. Kant Lal Roy died and left his share with his son, namely
Sanjay Kumar Rai and the sale deed in question was executed
by the four sons and one grandson of late Kameshwar Rai. The
petitioners have also filed a title suit bearing Title Suit No. 48 of
2021 and the said title suit has been admitted and
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 is also one of the defendants
in the said title suit. Moreover, the dispute is with regard to sale
and purchase of land which is purely civil in nature and none of
the acts, allegedly committed by these petitioners, would give
rise to any criminal liability. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 have vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1976 of 2026(3) dt.13-03-2026
4/4
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, nature of dispute and clean antecedents of the petitioners,
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is
allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist
Class, Jhanjharpur in connection with Complaint Case No. 43 of
2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the B.N.S.S..
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…