Patna High Court
Rakhi Gupta @ Kumari Rakhee GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- S B P SINGH
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, as the allegations were not specifically directed at her.
Summary
Rakhi Gupta applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a land dispute case (Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1147 of 2024) where the informant alleged that a sale deed was fraudulently registered in her favour and that she was involved in criminal intimidation and forgery. The petitioner contended that she is a bona‑fide purchaser, that the FIR contains only vague, omnibus allegations and that no specific charge of forgery or intimidation is made against her. The prosecution produced a copy of the sale deed showing a forged signature of the informant and identified an identifier, Rakesh Mohan, who was not an accused. The court examined whether there was sufficient material to deny bail and whether anticipatory bail could be granted under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. The judge held that, given the lack of specific incriminating evidence against the petitioner, anticipatory bail should be granted with conditions, and ordered her release on bail if arrested within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations of criminal intimidation and forgery.
- Whether the FIR contains specific charges against the petitioner sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- land fraud
- forgery
- criminal intimidation
- sale deed
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22109 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1147 Year-2024 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Rakhi Gupta @ Kumari Rakhee Gupta W/O Dr. Rajesh Kumar Ranjan @
Rajesh Kumar Ranjan Resident of Village- Dazy Homeo Hall, D.B. Road,
Ward No.- 10, P.S.- Saharsa Sadar, Dist.- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satyam Anand
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1147 of 2024 for
the offence under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 338, 336(3), 340(2)
amd 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has
alleged that on 05.09.2024, accused persons namely Kundan
Kumar Singh @ Sipu Singh, Sudhir Singh, and Saurabh Mishra
came to the residence of the informant and criminally
intimidated him. They threatened that the informant must
transfer his land to them, failing which they would forcibly get
the land sold to someone else. Thereafter, on 19.09.2024, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22109 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
informant came to know that a portion of his land measuring 1
kattha 12 dhur had been fraudulently registered to a person
without his knowledge or consent. Upon inquiry, it was revealed
that the said illegal registry was executed by Suryamohan Jha in
favour of Rakhi Gupta (petitioner). Shockingly, the informant’s
name, Chandraprakash Lal Das, was falsely shown as a witness
in the said registry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is quite innocent and had not committed any offence
as alleged in the F.I.R. rather she has falsely been implicated in
this case. The allegations made in the F.I.R. is totally false,
fabricated, concocted and having no essence of truth. Petitioner
is the bona fide purchaser of the land in question and had paid
due consideration amount for its purchase and only after that a
valid sale deed i.e. Sale Deed No. 16667 dated 19.09.2024 was
executed in her favour. Learned counsel further submits that
from perusal of F.I.R., it is evident that no any specific
allegation of forgery or criminal intimidation has been levelled
against the petitioner. All the allegations made in the F.I.R.
against this petitioner appears to be general and omnibus in
nature. Had the petitioner been aware of any such dispute, she
would never enter into such kind of transaction. A statement has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22109 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
been made in para 3 of the bail application that petitioner has
clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.
6. It is submitted that a xerox copy of the aforesaid
registered sale deed has been annexed with the bail application
as Annexure-2. A perusal of the same reveals that the sale deed
has been executed by Asha Jha in favour of Rakhi Gupta,
wherein one Rakesh Mohan has been shown as the identifier of
the executant. Further, the name and purported signature of
Chandraprakash Lal Das (informant) have been reflected as a
witness to the said document.
7. However, the informant has categorically denied
having either participated in the execution of the said sale deed
or having affixed his signature therein, and has specifically
alleged his signature on the sale deed as forged.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended
that the said identifier, namely Rakesh Mohan, has not been
arraigned as an accused in the present case despite the fact that
he was the person who identified the vendor at the time of
execution of the sale deed. It is further submitted that, even if
the property transaction is assumed to be disputed, the petitioner
has no concern with the alleged forged signature of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22109 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
informant, and no specific role has been attributed to the
petitioner in relation to the said act of forgery.
9. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is
inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
10. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Saharsa, in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1147
of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482 of B.N.S.S., as also with the condition that one of the
bailors should be close relative of the petitioner.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…