Patna High Court
Sanjiv Kumar SinhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The High Court ordered interim protection and directed mediation, holding that bail may be granted conditionally pending settlement of the underlying civil dispute.
Summary
Petitioners Sanjiv Kumar Sinha and his wife Ekta Sinha applied for pre‑arrest bail in a criminal case under Sections 351(2‑4), 308(2) and 352 of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, 2023, alleging that the FIR stems from a civil land dispute involving alleged illegal sale and forged documents. The State opposed bail, while the petitioners argued the matter is essentially civil and should be settled through mediation. The High Court, citing the Supreme Court’s observations in Paramjeet Batra v. State of Uttarakhand and S.N. Vijayalakshmi v. State of Karnataka, held that where a civil remedy is available, the criminal proceeding may be stayed to prevent abuse of process. The Court directed the petitioners to appear before the District Court and the District Mediation Centre for settlement, granting interim protection and conditioning bail on the outcome of mediation. If the parties fail to appear or reconcile, the interim protection lapses and the trial proceeds; otherwise, the petitioners are to be released on bail as deemed fit by the District Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR constitutes a criminal offence or is merely a civil land dispute disguised as a criminal case.
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted pending mediation in a case that may be a misuse of criminal process.
- Whether the High Court can direct mediation and condition bail under its inherent powers and Section 482 of the CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 308(2), 351(2), 351(3), 351(4), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- land dispute
- civil vs criminal
- mediation
- Section 482 CrPC
- abuse of process
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30341 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-356 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Sanjiv Kumar Sinha S/o Chinta Haran Pd Singh Resident of village-
Parshurampur, P.S.- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran
2. Ekta Sinha W/o Sanjiv Kumar Sinha Resident of village- Parshurampur,
P.S.- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 356 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 351(4),
308(2) and 352 of the BNS, 2023.
3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant,
Suman Kumar Sinha, alleged before the S.H.O., Turkauliya P.S.,
on 21.07.2025 that ancestral land measuring 16 kathas 18 dhurs
appertaining to Khata No. 99, Khesra No. 24 situated at Mauza-
Parshurampur, District-East Champaran, which had fallen into
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/6
the share of the informant’s father in Partition Suit No. 10/1976,
was illegally sold by Sanjeev Kumar Sinha (Petitioner No. 1) in
the name of his wife and others, for which Town Motihari P.S.
Case No. 687 of 2022 was instituted. The petitioner no.1 again
transferred the said land on the basis of forged and fabricated
documents to certain land mafias and, in conspiracy with them,
threatened the informant with dispossession and dire
consequences.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they
have falsely been implicated in the case. He further submitted
that the matter primarily relates to land dispute between the
parties which is civil in nature. There is case and counter case
between the parties. Father of the informant has already filed
Civil Suit bearing Title Suit No. 305/2023 on 03.05.2023 for
cancellation of the sale deed and the present case has been filed
by the informant on 21.07.2025. It is further submitted that for
amicable settlement of dispute between the parties outside the
Court, the matter be referred for mediation.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable
settlement outside the court.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/6
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners have
agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M.
on or before 05.06.2026.
7. Heard the parties
8. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the F.I.R., I am of the opinion that an opportunity is
required to be given to the parties to settle their score amicably
outside the Court.
9. In this regard, I find it apt to take note of the
observation made by the Apex Court in case of Paramjeet
Batra v. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2013) 11 SCC 673,
in which, the Apex Court in paragraph no. 12 has held as
follows:
"12. While exercising its jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Code the High Court has to
be cautious. This power is to be used sparingly and
only for the purpose of preventing abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of
justice. Whether a complaint discloses a criminal
offence or not depends upon the nature of facts
alleged therein. Whether essential ingredients of
criminal offence are present or not has to be judged
by the High Court. A complaint disclosing civil
transactions may also have a criminal texture. But
the High Court must see whether a dispute which is
essentially of a civil nature is given a cloak of
criminal offence. In such a situation, if a civil
remedy is available and is, in fact, adopted as has
happened in this case, the High Court should not
hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
4/6
prevent abuse of process of the court."
(emphasis supplied)
10. The Apex Court has reiterated the aforesaid
proposition in recent judgment of S. N. Vijayalakshmi & Ors.
vrs. The State of Karnataka and Anr. reported in (2025) SCC
Online SC 1575.
11. The petitioners have willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on or before 05.06.2026, so
that the matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
12. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to issue notices to the respective parties and
upon their appearance, refer the matter before the learned
Mediator of the District Mediation Center by fixing a date for
appearance of the parties to give effect to “Mediation for the
Nation 2.0”.
13. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned, upon appearance of the parties, shall make his/her
best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and thereafter submit
his/her report before the concerned learned District Court, well
within a period of three months, till then, no coercive action
shall be taken against the petitioners in connection with the
aforesaid case.
14. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
5/6
the Apex Court as referred hereinabove, the petitioners are
required to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
15. In case of failure on the part of the petitioners to
appear on or before 05.06.2026 before the learned District Court
or any date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioners shall automatically lose its force.
16. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the informant
to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection granted to
the petitioners shall continue and the trial shall proceed in
accordance with law.
17. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also,
petitioners are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such
terms and conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit
and proper.
18. If both the parties arrive at amicable settlement,
then they must withdraw the criminal cases, if any, which they
have lodged against each other.
19. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
20. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30341 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
6/6
Member Secretary, Bihar State Legal Services Authority and the
Patna High Court Mediation Centre for the purpose of record.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.