Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Most. Kamla DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that the dispute is primarily civil in nature and, given the petitioners' clean antecedent, they are entitled to bail.

Summary

Kamla Devi and Saurav Kumar were named in a criminal complaint (Case No. 880 of 2024) under Sections 318(4) and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly failing to return security money of Rs.14.20 lakh that had been given against a shop they owned. The shop was rented to the complainant, who allegedly stopped paying rent, sub‑let the premises and retained possession, resulting in the petitioners not receiving rent for five years. The petitioners contended that the matter was a civil landlord‑tenant dispute concerning recovery of security money, not a criminal offence, and that they had clean antecedents. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court noted the civil nature of the dispute and the petitioners' clean record. Accordingly, the court ordered their release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 each, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNS.

Issues considered

  • The applicability of Sections 318(4) and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita to a landlord‑tenant dispute over security money.
  • Whether the complaint constitutes a cognizable criminal offence or is essentially a civil matter.
  • The appropriateness of granting bail to the petitioners.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • civil dispute
  • landlord-tenant
  • security money
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • CrPC
  • clean antecedent
  • complaint case

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36723 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-880 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - PATNA CITY
                                                      District- Patna
                 ======================================================
           1.     Most. Kamla Devi, W/o Late Mathura Prasad Patwa
           2.    Saurav Kumar @ Saurabh Kumar, S/o Late Mathura Prasad Patwa
                 Both are resident of Mohalla-Machharhatta, Patna City, P.S.- Khajekalan,
                 Distt.- Patna.

                                                                              ... ... Petitioners
                                                    Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Kumar Rohit, S/o Santosh Kumar, R/o Village- Raipura, P.S.- Fatuha, Distt.-
                 Patna.

                                                         ... ... Opposite Parties
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr. Anil Kumar Maharaj, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-06-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. Both accused/petitioners are named in the

                   complaint and apprehending their arrest in connection with

                   Complaint Case No.880 of 2024 in which cognizance has

                   been taken under Sections 318(4) and 352 of the Bhartiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNS’).

                                3. As per FIR, the petitioners failed to return the

                   security money of Rs.14,20,000/- to informant, which was

                   given to the petitioners against a shop located in Patna City,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36723 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
                                            2/3




          which was given on rent to the complainant.

                       4.     It is submitted that both the parties are

          relatives. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of petitioners that after paying agreed rent of Rs.

          21,000/- per month, the complainant stopped to pay rent

          and exceeding further, he sub-let the shop to third person

          without any information and knowledge of the petitioners. It

          is submitted that the complainant is still in possession of the

          shop and is not paying agreed rent to the petitioners, which

          is the only source of her livelihood as the petitioner no. 1 is

          a widow lady. The rent of premises was not paid for last five

          years.

                       5. Arguing further, it is submitted that in view of

          all such facts, the dispute primarily appears civil in nature for

          which the present criminal prosecution is completely

          unoccasioned and unwarranted. Both petitioners are of clean

          antecedent.

                       6. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.

                       7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking note of fact, as the dispute is primarily regarding
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36723 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
                                                       3/3




                     recovery of security money out of admitted landlord-tenant

                     relationship, coupled with the fact that both petitioners are

                     of clean antecedent, accordingly, both petitioners, above-

                     named, are directed to be released on bail, in the event of

                     their arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of

                     four weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

                     Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount

                     each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st

                     Class, Patna City in connection with Complaint Case No.880

                     of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                     Section 438(2) of the CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the

                     BNSS.


                                                      (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
    Sanjeet/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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