Patna High Court
Madan RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court dismissed the anticipatory bail for the already‑arrested petitioner and granted bail to the other petitioners subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of relatives, were named in an FIR for alleged cheating and related offences under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, stemming from a dispute over a land sale where the informant claimed receipt of Rs.26 lakh in cash and Rs.5 lakh by bank. Petitioners argued that the matter was essentially civil, involving non‑payment of money and that the criminal prosecution was unwarranted. During the pendency of the petition, petitioner No.3, Babita Devi, was arrested, rendering her anticipatory bail request ineffective, and the court dismissed that portion of the relief. The court noted the civil nature of the dispute and, after the informant’s counsel failed to appear, directed that the remaining petitioners be released on bail upon surrender, subject to a bond and sureties, invoking Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order thus granted bail to petitioners No.1, 2, 4 and 5 while dismissing the anticipatory bail application of petitioner No.3.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a petitioner who has already been arrested
- Whether the criminal prosecution is maintainable given the dispute is primarily civil in nature
- Whether bail should be granted to the remaining petitioners under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 BNSS
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120-B, 311, 379, 406, 420, 427, 465, 467, 468, 471, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- civil dispute
- criminal prosecution
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
- bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84526 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2022 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Madan Rai S/o Late Binda Prasad Rai @ Binda Rai
2. Krishna Rai S/o Late Binda Prasad Rai @ Binda Rai
3. Smt. Babita Devi @ Babita Devi @ Smt. Bebi Devi W/o Late Ramjatan Rai
4. Parmeshwar Rai, S/o Bindeshwari Rai
5. Avinash Kumar @ Avinash Rai S/o Bindeshwari Rai
All are R/o Village - Gangajal Tola, P.S. - Sonpur, District - Saran
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Abhay Kumar, S/o Late Ramadhar Yadav, R/o Village - Arar More, Ward
No. 26, P.S. - Town, District - Gopalganj
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 At the outset, it is submitted by learned counsel
appearing for petitioners that during pendency of present
petition, petitioner no.3, namely, Babita Devi @ Babita Devi
@ Smt. Bebi Devi has been arrested and, therefore, her
prayer qua anticipatory bail has become infructuous.
2. In view of aforesaid submission, the anticipatory
bail prayer of petitioner no.3 namely, Babita Devi @ Babita
Devi @ Smt. Bebi Devi stands dismissed, as having become
infructuous.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84526 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
3. Now, this petition survives only for petitioner
no.1, Madan Rai, petitioner no.2, Krishna Rai, petitioner no.4
Parmeshwar Rai and petitioner no.5 Avinash Kumar @
Avinash Rai.
4. The accused/petitioners are named in the FIR
and apprehending their arrest in connection with Gopalganj
Town P.S. Case No.246 of 2022 registered under Sections
420, 406, 465, 467, 468, 471, 379, 311, 427, 504 and 120-
B of the Indian Penal Code.
5. Allegation against petitioners is to cheat the
informant, who is a builder for a piece of land after receiving
Rs. 26 lakhs in cash and Rs. 5 lakhs through bank transaction.
6. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioners that primarily the dispute between the parties
appears civil in nature, where due to non-payment of money
within agreed time period in terms of agreement, the sale-
deed was not executed. It is pointed out that in terms of
agreement only Rs.5 lakhs was received by petitioners’ side
and the allegation that Rs.26 lakhs was paid in cash is
completely false without having any supporting material.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84526 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
While concluding argument, it is submitted that the present
criminal prosecution is completely un-occasioned and
unwarranted in view of nature of dispute, which is purely civil
in nature. All petitioners have claimed clean antecedent.
7. Learned APP opposed the prayer of anticipatory
bail.
8. Despite of repeated calls, Mr. Manoj Kumar
Sinha, learned counsel appearing for informant failed to join
the present proceeding.
9. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as dispute primarily appears civil in nature,
accordingly, petitioner no.1, Madan Rai, petitioner no.2,
Krishna Rai, petitioner no.4 Parmeshwar Rai and petitioner
no.5 Avinash Kumar @ Avinash Rai, in the event of their
arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four
weeks are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in connection
with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No.246 of 2022, subject to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84526 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…