Patna High Court
Rahbar AbdinversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, directing his release on a bail bond subject to Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahbar Abdin, was named in an FIR alleging forgery and cheating in the sale of two shops, with false signatures purportedly created on the agreement and sale deed. The petitioner’s mother, Renuka Kumari Sinha, was the principal accused and had already been granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the dispute was essentially civil, that the petitioner was merely the son of the accused, and that his prior criminal cases should not preclude bail, citing Supreme Court precedents. The State contended that the petitioner was instrumental in the alleged forgery and land‑grabbing scheme. The Court held that the matter was primarily a civil dispute, noted the mother’s bail, and consequently granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bail bond and conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite allegations of forgery and his criminal antecedents
- Whether the dispute underlying the FIR is a civil matter rather than a criminal offence
- Whether Section 482(2) of the CrPC can be invoked to grant bail in this context
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308(3), 318(3), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- civil dispute
- criminal antecedents
- Section 482
- Indian Penal Code
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7856 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-813 Year-2025 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna
======================================================
Rahbar Abdin S/o- Sarwar Abdin R/v- Pushpanjali Complex Boring Road, Ps-
S.K Puri Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Sr.Adv.
Mr. Aakash Singh, Adv.
Mr. Vipin Kr. Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Adv.
For the Informant : Mr. Avinash Kr. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Mukul Kr. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Kr. Bal Govind Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
7 07-07-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Pirbahore P.S.
Case No. 813 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 336(2), 338, 318(4), 308(3), 318(3), 3(5)
BNS.
3. The allegation against petitioner is to cheat
informant by creating forge documents qua sale of shop no.
71 and 72 of Meena Bazar market, Muradpur, Patna. It is
alleged that the false signature of the informant was created
over “agreement to sale” and also on document for “absolute
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7856 of 2026(7) dt.07-07-2026
2/5
sale deed”.
4. It is submitted by Mr. Bindhyachal Singh,
learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
that facial perusal of FIR categorically suggest that dispute is
primarily civil in nature. It is submitted that the agreement
to sale/ absolute sale deed dated 18.03.2025 were signed
between the mother of the petitioner namely, Renuka
Kumari Sinha and the informant. It is pointed out that the
mother of the petitioner was main accused in this case and
she was granted anticipatory bail by ld. Trial court itself by
ABP No. 4467 of 2025 dated 27.01.2026.
5. Arguing further, Mr. Singh submitted that in
aforesaid fact the implication of petitioner with present crime
in question is only with harassing approach, where this
petitioner appears implicated only being the son of the co-
accused, who executed the agreement of sale/ absolute sale
deed namely, Renuka Kumari Sinha. It is also submitted that
only for the reason that this petitioner found involved in
twelve more criminal cases of similar nature, his prayer of
anticipatory bail was declined by the ld. Trial court. In this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7856 of 2026(7) dt.07-07-2026
3/5
connection Mr. Singh submitted that petitioner is a business
man and running a chain of school and also other business
activities related with land deals, and therefore, maximum
cases are arising out of land dispute, where case and counter
case were filed. It is submitted that in all such criminal cases
petitioner is on bail.
6. Mr. Singh further submitted that if merit of this
case otherwise appears in favor of the petitioner, merely on
the ground of criminal antecedents ordinarily his prayer of
bail should not be declined, and in support of his submission,
Mr. Singh relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme
Court as available through Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh and Anr. reported in (2020) 11 SCC 648.
7. Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Avanish Kr.
Singh learned counsel for the informant while opposing the
prayer of bail submitted that this petitioner being son of the
accused namely Renuka Kumari Sinha was instrumental
behind entire issue and as the family of informant is
suffering from congenital eye issue, taking advantage of that
this petitioner who is land grabbing person approached
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7856 of 2026(7) dt.07-07-2026
4/5
informant with assurance that he will sort out the issue of
tenancy dispute with shopkeeper of Meena Bazar and
obtained signature of informant. It is submitted that market
value of one shop of Meena Bazar is Rs. 90 lakh as on date,
therefore, agreement of sale/ absolute sale deed against the
total consideration amount of Rs. 9 lakh not appears
convincing. It is submitted that the agreement were
intentionally executed through mother.
8. Arguing further, it is submitted by learned
counsel that recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court declined a
prayer of anticipatory bail of appellant, who was involved in
22 more criminal cases, and in support of his submission he
relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as
available through Sharad Sehgal vs. State of U.P. and
Anr. reported in 2026 SCC OnLine 740, whereas he could
not disputed the factual submission that agreement of sale /
absolute sale deed was executed between the mother of this
petitioner and informant.
9. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of fact as the dispute between the parties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7856 of 2026(7) dt.07-07-2026
5/5
primarily appears civil in nature, where agreement of sale/
absolute sale deed was signed between the informant and
mother of this petitioner, who has already granted
anticipatory bail by ld. Trial court, accordingly petitioner
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before
the court below within a period of four weeks, is directed to
be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Patna
/concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection
with Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 813 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.