Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Gupta @ Puttu saoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The High Court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a complaint case (No. 5143 of 2024) alleging offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, with co‑accused, forged documents to claim ownership of a piece of land and assaulted the informant and his daughter‑in‑law. The petitioner contended that the land had been lawfully transferred by registered deeds and that the dispute was purely civil, filed to harass him. No representative appeared for the complainant despite service of notice. The learned APP opposed bail, but the Court, considering the general and omnibus nature of the accusations and the civil character of the dispute, exercised its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and granted anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a complaint alleging forgery, assault and outrage of modesty under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 452 IPC.
- Whether the matter is a criminal offence or a civil land‑dispute that does not warrant criminal prosecution.
- Whether the High Court may invoke its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to discharge the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 452, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- land dispute
- civil vs criminal
- Section 482
- High Court inherent powers
- IPC sections 467 468 471 452
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2799 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5143 Year-2024 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Gupta @ Puttu sao Son of Late Jaswant Sao
Resident of Yash Anand, Fuel Patrol Pump, Digha - Ashiyana Road, P.S.-
Digha, District - Patna at present resident of Digha Ghat Chauhatta, P.S.-
Digha, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kishore Kumar Son of Late Rama Sao Resident of Digha Railway Gumti, at
present resident of Digha near Atal Path, P.S.- Digha, District - Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP
For the Complainant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. Despite valid service of notice, no one appears on
behalf of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.
3. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 467,
468, 471 and 452 of the B.N.S..
4. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this
petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, came to the
house of informant claiming ownership of land on the basis of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2799 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
forged documents. It is further alleged that upon protest, this
petitioner assaulted informant and his daughter-in-law and also
attempted to outrage her modesty by tearing her clothes.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, the land in question
was purchased by one Shanti Devi wife of Rama Sao through
registered sale deed on 07.01.1994 and thereafter, the same was
sold through registered sale deed to the wife of this petitioner,
namely Amrita Dutt. Complainant is son of Shanti Devi and has
wrongfully been claiming ownership over the land in question.
Moreover, the dispute is with regard to right, title and
possession over a piece of land which is purely civil in nature
and only with a view to harass and humiliate the petitioner, this
false and concocted case has been lodged.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and general and omnibus nature of accusation, the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2799 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
petitioner be enlarged 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 J.M. 1 st Class, Patna in
connection with Complaint Case No. 5143 of 2024, 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…