Patna High Court
Kundan Kumar BhartiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The High Court held that the FIR is essentially civil, warranting pre‑arrest bail and referral to mediation to avoid abuse of process.
Summary
The petitioners were accused of forging sale deeds and illegally mutating land records, leading to an FIR under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act. The petitioner sought pre‑arrest bail, arguing that the dispute was civil in nature and that the co‑accused, not he, executed the forged documents. The Court examined whether the FIR disclosed a criminal offence or merely a civil dispute and, relying on Supreme Court precedents, concluded that the allegations lacked a substantial criminal element. Consequently, the Court directed that the matter be referred to mediation under the Mediation Act, 2023 and ordered the petitioner’s release on pre‑arrest bail, subject to conditions. The Court also noted that no order could be passed regarding petitioner‑2 without further verification. The application was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- Does the FIR disclose a criminal offence or is it essentially a civil dispute?
- Should pre‑arrest bail be granted when the underlying matter is civil in nature?
- Is referral to mediation under the Mediation Act, 2023 appropriate to prevent abuse of process?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- civil dispute
- abuse of process
- mediation
- Section 482 CrPC
- land sale fraud
- title suit
- criminal proceeding
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80579 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2025 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Kundan Kumar Bharti, Male, aged about 30 years, S/O Ashok Paswan R/O
Village- Katari Hill, P.S.- Chandauti, District- Gaya
2. Sanjay Yadav, aged about 46 years, S/O Late Lalu Yadav @ Lalu Singh R/O
Village- Katari Hill, Baljori Bigha, P.S.- Chandauti, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmanand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 18-04-2026 At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the present
bail application, petitioner no. 2 was arrested and was
subsequently granted bail by the learned District Court.
2. Heard Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.
Parmanand Kumar, learned APP for the State.
3. The petitioner no.1 seeks pre-arrest bail in
connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 192 of 2025
registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 319(2),
318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 3(5), of the BNS.
4. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80579 of 2025(3) dt.18-04-2026
2/6
petitioners along with other co-accused persons had sold a piece
of land bearing Khata No.186, Plots No.633, 627, 631, 505, 517,
520 and 519 on the basis of forged sale deed and power of
attorney and had got the aforesaid land mutated in their name
and forcibly removed the informant from the possession of the
aforesaid land.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any
forgery rather the co-accused Anil Sharma, who has been given
power of attorney by the informant, has executed the sale deed
in favour of the accused persons. Petitioner was also the witness
of the said power of attorney and legality of said power of
attorney and for cancellation of such sale deeds is subject matter
of Title Suit No.337 of 2025. The allegation itself is devoid of
any element of criminality. However, on instruction, learned
counsel submitted that the matter is purely civil in nature and
to buy peace of mind, petitioner wants to settle the dispute
amicably outside the Court.
6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable
settlement outside the court.
7. Counsel for the petitioner on instruction, submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80579 of 2025(3) dt.18-04-2026
3/6
that the petitioner no.1 has agreed to appear before the learned
District Court at 10:30 A.M. on or before 04.05.2026.
8. Heard the parties
9. Considering the nature of allegation made in the
F.I.R. which has a civil flavour and the same prima facie don’t
disclose an overwhelming element of criminality. In the absence
of the element of criminality, if both civil and criminal cases are
allowed to continue, it will definitely amount to abuse of the
process of law, as the title suit no.337/2025 is still pending and
petitioner wants to settle the dispute outside the court.
10. In this regard, I find it apt to refer the
observation made by the Apex Court in para-12 in case of
Paramjeet Batra v. State of Uttarakhand, (2013) 11 SCC 673,
which is reproduced hereinafter::
"12. While exercising its jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Code the High Court has to
be cautious. This power is to be used sparingly and
only for the purpose of preventing abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of
justice. Whether a complaint discloses a criminal
offence or not depends upon the nature of facts
alleged therein. Whether essential ingredients of
criminal offence are present or not has to be judged
by the High Court. A complaint disclosing civil
transactions may also have a criminal texture. But
the High Court must see whether a dispute which is
essentially of a civil nature is given a cloak of
criminal offence. In such a situation, if a civil
remedy is available and is, in fact, adopted as has
happened in this case, the High Court should not
hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings to
prevent abuse of process of the court."
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80579 of 2025(3) dt.18-04-2026
4/6
11. In case of Usha Chakraborty v. State of West
Bengal, (2023) 15 SCC 135, while quashing the FIR therein and
further proceedings based thereon, the Apex Court observed as
under: -
‘...the factual position thus would reveal that the
genesis as also the purpose of criminal proceedings are nothing but
the aforesaid incident and further that the dispute involved is
essentially of civil nature.’
12. The Apex Court has reiterated the aforesaid
preposition in its recent judgment of S.N. Vijayalakshmi &
Ors. Vrs. The State of Karnataka and Anr. reported in (2025)
SCC Online SC 1575.
13. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to refer the matter under the provision of
Mediation Act, 2023 before the learned Mediator of the District
Mediation Center after issuing notice to the O.P. No.2 by fixing
a date for their appearance to give effect to “Mediation for the
Nation 2.0.”
14. Thereafter, learned Mediator of the District
Mediation Center concerned shall make his/her best efforts to
settle the dispute amicably and submit his/her report before the
concerned learned District Court, well within a period of three
months, till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the
petitioner no.1 in connection with the aforesaid case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80579 of 2025(3) dt.18-04-2026
5/6
15. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
the Apex Court as referred above, the petitioner no.1 is required
to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and conditions as
the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
16. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner no.1
to appear on or before 04.05.2026 before the learned District
Court or any date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim
protection granted to the petitioner shall automatically lose its
force.
17. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
complainant/informant to reconcile, then in that case, the
interim protection granted to the petitioner no.1 shall continue
and the trial shall proceed in accordance with law.
18. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner
no.1 is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms
and conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and
proper.
19. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, it has been
informed that the petitioner no.2 was arrested during the
pendency of the present bail application and he was released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80579 of 2025(3) dt.18-04-2026
6/6
regular bail, however, in absence of such information or
supplementary affidavit having been filed in this regard on
behalf of the petitioner no.2, the said information is required to
be verified by the learned District Court and as such, no order is
passed in respect of petitioner no.2.
20. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Member Secretary, Bihar State Legal Services Authority and the
Patna High Court Mediation Centre for the purpose of record.
21. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…