Patna High Court
Akhil Kumar RoyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified monetary and procedural conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Akhil Kumar Roy, was implicated in a complaint alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust, and related offences under Sections 406, 420, 323, 120B, 504 and 34 of the IPC for selling land without title. He contended that he acted under a power of attorney from the true owner, Saroj Kumari, and that the dispute was essentially civil, noting a sale deed dated 2012 and a complaint filed only in 2023. The petitioner offered to deposit the consideration amount in installments and sought anticipatory bail, while the State and complainant opposed it. The Court, considering the general nature of the accusations, the delay in filing, and the petitioner’s undertaking, granted anticipatory bail with a bail bond and several monetary conditions, invoking Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order was issued solely for bail purposes without addressing the merits of the underlying civil dispute.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a complaint case involving alleged cheating and related offences under the IPC.
- Whether the delay in lodging the complaint and the civil nature of the land dispute justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC may be imposed while granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 323, 34, 406, 420, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cheating
- civil land dispute
- Indian Penal Code
- delay in complaint
- power of attorney
- bail conditions
- CrPC Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67257 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1206 Year-2023 Thana- BHAGALPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Akhil Kumar Roy S/O Bindeshwari Roy R/o Resham Nagar, PS- Zero Mile,
Distt.- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bobby Kumari W/O Ajay Kumar Choudhary Permanent R/O Vill.- Gauripur,
P.S.- Bihpur, Dist.- Bhagalpur. at Present Jyoti Vihar, PS- Zero Mile, Distt.-
Bhagalpur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP
For the Complainant : Mr. Subodh Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406,
420, 323, 120B, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint petition, it is alleged that this
petitioner induced the complainant to purchase a land for Rs.
3,32,000/- and after taking the consideration money, he executed
a sale deed in favour of the complainant. However, later on,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67257 of 2025(6) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
complainant discovered that the land in question does not
belong to this petitioner and he has sold a land to her without
having right, title or possession over the same. It is further
alleged that when complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 demanded
her money back, this petitioner refused to return the same and
also threatened her.
4. 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, co-accused Saroj
Kumari was the real owner of the land in question and the same
was also mutated in her name. Co-accused Saroj Kumari had
given registered power of attorney to this petitioner and on the
basis of the same, this petitioner executed the sale deed in
favour of the complainant. Moreover, the sale deed in question
was executed in the year 2012 and the present complaint
petition has been filed in the year 2023 and there is no plausible
explanation for the inordinate delay. The dispute is with regard
to sale and purchase of land, which is purely civil in nature. By
way of filing supplementary-affidavit, it is further submitted that
at this stage, without admitting his guilt, petitioner is ready to
deposit the amount alleged consideration money, amounting to
Rs. 3,32,000/- (Rupees three lakh thirty-two thousand), in easy
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67257 of 2025(6) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
installments.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing on
behalf of the State and learned counsel for the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, delay in lodging
of the complaint petitioner and aforesaid undertaking of the
petitioner, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is allowed.
7. 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,
Bhagalpur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1206 of
2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the B.N.S.S., along with the following terms and conditions:
“ A. The Complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 would
file an affidavit before the court below and bring
on record her saving bank account number for its
communication to the petitioner.
B. At the time of furnishing bail-bond, Rs.
1,32,000/- (Rupees one lakh thirty-two thousand)
shall be paid in the account of the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 and a receipt
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67257 of 2025(6) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
of the same shall be submitted at the time of
furnishing bail bond.
C. Rest amount i.e. Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two
lakh) shall be bank account of the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 in two equal
installments amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/- each
within a period of six months from the date of
furnishing bail-bond.
D. The aforesaid payment shall be subject to the
final outcome of the case.
E. If petitioner fails to comply the aforesaid
direction of this Court, the learned Trial Court is
free to cancel the bail-bond of the petitioner.”
8. It is made clear that without going into the merit
of the case, the aforesaid order has been passed only for the
purpose of grant of bail.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…