Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Amit DasversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Amit Das, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a complaint (No. 6567 of 2023) alleging offences under IPC sections 323, 387, 406, 420, 467 and 120(B) relating to a land‑sale dispute. The prosecution alleged that the complainant had given money for land purchase but the accused failed to execute the sale deed. The petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, had not signed the sale agreement despite his name appearing as vendor, and possessed a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail on the ground of the serious nature of the allegations. The High Court, after considering the facts, allowed the anticipatory bail, directing release on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482 of the BNSS.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the alleged offences under the IPC.
  • Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • land sale fraud
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 482 BNSS
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31262 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6567 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                          Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Amit Das S/o Late Chandu Das Resident of Near Universal Sound, P.S.-
                 Kankarbagh, District- Patna, Bihar At present residing at B/132 Housing
                 Colony Kankarbagh, P.S.- Kankarbagh, Distt.- Patna

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Sanjay Kumar Sinha S/o Late Kapileshwar Prasad Sahay R/o Slum 36,
                 Kankerbagh Colony, Near Panch Mandir, Lohia Nagar, P.S.- Kankerbagh,
                 Distt.- Patna

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.Amaresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                                                Mr.Vaibhav Narayan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-03-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                    2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in

                   connection with Complaint Case No. 6567(C) of 2023

                   registered for the offence under Sections 323, 387, 406, 420,

                   467, 120(B) of Indian Penal Code.

                                    3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant has

                   given money to the accused persons for purchase of land, but

                   after taking money, accused persons did not execute the sale

                   deed in the complainant’s name and due to this reason, the

                   present complaint case has been filed.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31262 of 2025(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                                          2/2




                                     4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the

                        petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been

                        implicated in this case. It is next submitted that petitioner has

                        not signed the agreement for sale, although his name has been

                        mentioned in the body of the agreement for sale in the column

                        of vendor. Petitioner has clean antecedent.

                                         5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer

                        for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                        6. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application

                        is allowed.

                                        7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of

                        his arrest or surrender before the concerned Court below within

                        four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail

                        bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

                        like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                        Magistrate First Class, Patna/ concerned Court below in

                        connection with Complaint Case No. 6567 of 2023, subject to

                        the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of

                        Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 482 of the BNSS.



                                                   (Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.