Amit Shrivastava @ Amit Kumar ShrivastavaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7386 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-526 Year-2025 Thana- SIWAN CITY District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
           1.     Amit Shrivastava @ Amit Kumar Shrivastava Son of Vishwanath Prasad
                 Resident of Village - Rafipur, P.S. - Hussainganj, District - Siwan.
           2.    Shah Alam Son of Samsuddin Resident of Village - Harihas, P.S. -
                 Hussainganj, District - Siwan.
           3.    Neeraj Sharma Son of Ramesh Sahrma Resident of Village - Khanpur
                 Khairati, P.S. - Hussainganj, District - Siwan.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    Kumar Tushar Son of Late Braj Haran Prasad Resident of Village - Harihas,
                 P.S. - Hussainganj, District - Siwan.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ramchandra Sahni
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Jai Narain Thakur
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   24-02-2026                         Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in

                   connection with Siwan Town P.S. Case No.526 of 2025, F.I.R

                   dated 07.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 318(4), 336(3), 337 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

                   Sanhita, 2023.

                               3.     According to prosecution case, the informant

                   alleges that the accused persons fraudulently executed a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7386 of 2026(3) dt.24-02-2026
                                            2/4




          registered sale deed regarding his land (Khata No. 1015, Plot

          No. 965) by forging his and his brother’s signatures on stamp

          papers dated 30.05.2025. He claims that although an agreement

          for Rs.23,00,000 was made, Rs.12,00,000 remains unpaid. Upon

          obtaining certified copies of the sale deed, he discovered

          discrepancies in signatures and photographs, leading to

          allegations of forgery and conspiracy against the accused.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

          petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the

          present case. It has next been submitted that a sale deed dated

          05.06.2025 is said to have been executed by the informant and

          his elder brother, after receiving full amount of Rs.16,43,000/-

          from one Shailesh Kumar Yadav and the petitioner Nos.1, 2 and

          3 are the deed writer, identifier and witness of the sale deed in

          question respectively. It is the case of the petitioners that the

          amount which was fixed by the informant and his elder brother,

          has already been received and only thereafter, the sale deed was

          presented before the Registrar, which was ultimately registered.

          It has next been submitted that the petitioners are not

          beneficiaries of the sale deed and have clean antecedent.

                      5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for

          the informant / O.P. No.2 vehemently opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7386 of 2026(3) dt.24-02-2026
                                            3/4




          anticipatory bail application but does not dispute the factual

          position which has been submitted by the learned counsel for

          the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          that a bona fide sale deed dated dated 05.06.2025 is said to have

          been executed by the informant and his elder brother and the

          petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 are the deed writer, identifier and witness

          of the sale deed respectively. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to

          grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

          their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period

          of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 C.J.M., Siwan, in connection with Siwan Town P.S.

          Case No.526 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure /

          Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and

          with other following conditions:-

                       (i) one of the bailors should be the family

          member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide

          official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7386 of 2026(3) dt.24-02-2026
                                                       4/4




                                  (ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every

                     date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two

                     consecutive       dates     without      plausible   reason   will   entail

                     cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

                                  (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or

                     promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

                     failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

                     cancellation of the bail bonds;

                                  (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any

                     criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty

                     to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.



                                                   (Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-

U      T