Patna High Court
Ashok Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that, given the primarily civil nature of the dispute and the inordinate delay in filing the complaint, bail must be granted to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Ashok Kumar Singh and his son Sidarth Kumar Singh, were named in a criminal complaint alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust, dishonest misappropriation of property and criminal conspiracy under IPC sections 406, 409, 420 and 120‑B. They contended that the matter was essentially a civil dispute over a land‑sale agreement dating back to 2003, complicated by a title suit filed by the petitioner's sister and the petitioner's serious illness. The complainant filed the criminal complaint in 2023, more than ten years after the alleged agreement, and omitted the execution date of the sale deed. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court observed that the delay and the civil nature of the controversy made the criminal charges tenuous. Accordingly, the court ordered that the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties each, subject to the conditions of CrPC Section 438(2) and CrPC Section 482(2).
Issues considered
- Whether the dispute arising from the alleged land‑sale agreement is a civil matter that warrants dismissal of the criminal complaint.
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the pending charges under IPC sections 406, 409, 420 and 120‑B.
- Whether the delay of ten years in filing the complaint affects the propriety of arrest and bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120-B, 406, 409, 420
Subjects
- bail
- civil dispute
- criminal complaint
- cheating
- IPC
- CrPC
- delay
- title suit
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41007 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5279 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
1. Ashok Kumar Singh, son of Late Satyadeb Singh,
2. Sidarth Kumar Singh @ Sidarth, Son of Ashok Kumar Singh
Both are resident of Village-Srinagar, P.S.- Chandi, District -Nalanda At
Present Resident of Professor Colony, Dhaneshwar Ghat, P.S. -Bihar,
District -Nalanda
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Usha Devi, Wife of Chandreshwar Sao, Resident of village-Yogipur, Post-
Lohia Nagar, P.S.- Patrakar Nagar, Kankarbagh, Dist- Patna
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State duly
assisted by learned counsel appearing for the complainant.
2. Both accused/petitioners are named in the
complaint and apprehending their arrest in connection with
Complaint Case No.5279(C) of 2023 in which cognizance
has been taken under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 120-B of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint, petitioners alleged to cheat
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41007 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
the complainant as not to act in accordance with agreement
to sell for a piece of land. The description of which, is
available in para-4 of the complaint petition itself. The
complainant alleged to pay Rs.7,13,300/- to petitioners in
the year 2003 in furtherance of the agreement of the plot
No.2/M/35 of Bahadurpur Housing Colony, Patna.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioners that the dispute is primarily civil in nature. It is
submitted that due to litigation of co-sharer i.e. sister of
petitioner no.1, the petitioners were not in a position to
execute the sale deed, for which, initially, C.W.J.C.
No.11103 of 2013 was preferred by the sister of petitioner
no.1, wherein she was directed to file title suit. It is
submitted that immediately after executing the agreement to
sell with complainant, the petitioner no.1 becomes seriously
ill and he is under treatment since 2014 for his various
ailments. It is also submitted that complaint in issue was
lodged for the occurrence of year 2013 i.e. after ten years of
alleged agreement. It is submitted that complainant
intentionally left to mention the “execution time” of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41007 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
agreement. It is submitted that petitioner no.2 has been
implicated with present case only being the son of petitioner
no.1. The petitioners claimed clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact, as the dispute primarily civil in nature,
where complaint in issue appears to be lodged after ten
years of the alleged agreement, accordingly, both above-
named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender
in the court below within a period of four weeks, are directed
to be released on bail, 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 in connection with
Complaint Case No.5279(C) of 2023, 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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.