Patna High Court
Rauf Gadi @ Rauf GaddiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that the dispute is essentially civil and, under its inherent powers, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioners Rauf Gadi, his wife Lalmuni and Md. Sahabuddin sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a complaint alleging forgery, cheating, criminal conspiracy and assault relating to a disputed piece of land. The complaint claimed the petitioners had forged a sale deed and threatened the complainant after illegally transferring the land. The petitioners contended that the land had been lawfully purchased through a chain of registered deeds dating back to 1944 and that the dispute was purely civil, with no specific criminal allegation against them. The court observed that the matter centered on competing title claims and that both parties were unable to produce revenue or mutation documents, rendering it a civil dispute not suitable for adjudication in the anticipatory bail application. Consequently, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, to be executed within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners despite the complaint alleging offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 384, 323 and 504.
- Whether the allegations constitute a criminal case or are essentially a civil land‑title dispute.
- Whether the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC to grant anticipatory bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 384, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- land dispute
- forgery
- cheating
- criminal conspiracy
- civil suit
- Section 482 CrPC
- IPC sections 420,467,468,471,384,323,504
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69852 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2024 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Rauf Gadi @ Rauf Gaddi S/O Sarfraj Raut @ Sarfraj Gaddi Resident of
village- Bhogari, P.S.- Majauliya, District- West champaran
2. Lalmuni W/O Rauf Gaddi Resident of village- Bhogari, P.S.- Majauliya,
District- West champaran
3. Md. Sahabuddin S/O Abdul Kutus Resident of village- Bhogari, P.S.-
Majauliya, District- West champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Raju Hawari S/O Mohan Hawari Resident of village- Harpur Tola Bhogadi,
P.S.- Majauliya, District- West champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sujeet Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Sen Prasad Singh
For the informant : Mr. Ram Adya Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 06-04-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with
Complaint Case No. 02 of 2024 dated 02.01.2024 registered
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 384, 323 and 504 of the
I.P.C.
3. As per complaint the land under Khata No. - 146, Plot No.
- 1232 having Area -10 Dhoors is the the ancestral khatiyani
land of one Bhulai Gaddi. The complainant claims to have
purchased the land from Bhulai Gaddi through sale deed dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69852 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
2/4
11.07.2023. The petitioners after the sale deed of the
complainant, hatched a conspiracy and made some change by
cutting in R.S. Khatiyan and added a forged name and on that
basis the petitioners made a forged genealogical table and the
petitioner no -1 / Rauf Gaddi transferred the land showing
himself to be the descendant of Khatiyani Raiyat in the name of
his wife namely, Lalmuni (petitioner no.2) in which the
petitioner no. -3 i.e. Md. Sahabuddin was an identifier. Further,
the petitioner no. 1 transferred the land in the name of the local
Mukhiya namely Asgar Ali in which the petitioner no. 1 -Rauf
Gaddi has included the land of the complainant in the forged
sale deed. When the complainant made inquiry regarding the
said, then the petitioners threatened the complainant to kill and
also assaulted him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners
are innocent and they have not committed any offence in the
manner alleged. He submits that as a matter of fact the land
bearing Khata No. - 146, Plot No.- 1232 was purchased by one
Bhoj Raut through a registered sale deed dated 23.03.1944 from
Devsaran Raut, Ganesh Raut and Jairam Raut. Accordingly,
Bhoj Raut took possession over the land. Thereafter, Bhoj Raut
had sold 2 Katha 3 Dhoor land of Khata No.- 146 and Plot No.-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69852 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
3/4
1232 in favor of one Sarfraj Raut @ Sarfraj Gaddi vide
registered sale deed dated 25.05.1974. After the death of Sarfraj
Gaddi (father of the petitioner no.-1), the petitioner no. 1 has
taken possession over the said land and the petitioner no.- 1
executed the sale deed in respect of Plot No.- 1232, Area- 2
Katha and 3 Dhoor, Plot No- 1559, Area -8 Katha 15 Dhoor &
Plot No. 1713, Area 2 Katha 3 Dhoor dated 19.07.2023 in
favour of his wife Lalmuni. Thereafter, the petitioner no. 2-
Lalmuni, who is the purchaser of the said land, filed for
mutation of the said land before the Circle Officer, Majhauliya
but due to intervention and objection of the complainant the said
land was not mutated and is kept pending. He next submits that
petitioners have not committed any cheating, forgery and
criminal conspiracy. There is no specific allegation against the
petitioners. The petitioners are having clean antecedent.
2. Considering the fact that it is a land dispute between the
parties, both parties are not in a position to produce revenue
receipt as well as mutation order, both sides are claiming that
the land in question belongs to them, accordingly, this issue
cannot be decided in the present anticipatory bail application
and prima facie it appears to the court that this is a civil dispute,
as such, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69852 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
4/4
petitioners.
6. Let the petitioners, above named, be released on
anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of four weeks from today on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, District - West Champaran in
connection with Complaint Case No. 02 of 2024 subject to the
condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…