Patna High Court
Raju SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners because they were not the executants of the sale deed, have no criminal antecedent, and the vendor is deceased.
Summary
The petitioners, four members of the Sahani family, sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case (Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 39 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to a fraudulent land sale. The FIR alleged that the petitioners, through their wife Shila Devi and brothers, misrepresented ownership of a parcel of land and obtained Rs. 52,42,500 from Pristine Mega Food Park Pvt. Ltd, which was later discovered to be under litigation and owned by a different person, Prahlad Sahni. The petitioners contended they were merely laborers, not the executants of the sale deed, which was signed by their mother Phool Devi, who has since died, and they have no criminal antecedent. The informant’s counsel argued that the petitioners were the real beneficiaries and the sale proceeds were transferred to their accounts. The court, considering the lack of direct involvement in executing the deed, the death of the vendor, and the petitioners’ clean record, exercised its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 and granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties. The order directs that the bail be effective if the petitioners are arrested or surrender within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 in view of the alleged offences under the IPC.
- Whether the petitioners, who were not the executants of the sale deed, can be held liable for the alleged fraud and related IPC offences.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- Indian Penal Code
- land fraud
- sale deed
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8883 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2025 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran
======================================================
1. Raju Sahani S/o Late Bali Sahani Resident of Village- Rasulpur, P.S.-
Nayagaon, District- Saran
2. Shiv Kumar Sahani S/o Late Bali Sahani Resident of Village- Rasulpur, P.S.-
Nayagaon, District- Saran
3. Sinhashan Sahani S/o Late Bali Sahani Resident of Village- Rasulpur, P.S.-
Nayagaon, District- Saran
4. Shila Devi W/o Sri Raju Sahani Resident of Village- Rasulpur, P.S.-
Nayagaon, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Rakesh Kumar s/o-Late Baikunth Narayan Singh,R/O-3rd floor,wing
5,commercial plaza,Hotel Redison Blue,Mahipalpur,New Delhi-110037
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Bhusan
Mr. Ankit Nath Jha
Mr.Nawnit Kumar Tiwary
For the Opposite Party/state: Mrs. Sucheta Yadav
For the informant : Mr. Amirtya Raj
Mr. Saket Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 39 of 2025 dated 28.02.2025
registered under Section 406 / 420 / 467 / 468 / 471 / 506 / 34 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8883 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/5
the I.P.C.
3. As per the F.I.R. the prosecution story in brief is
that Pristine Mega Food Park Pvt. Ltd required land for
company’s purpose at Sonepur and for the same the informant
approached a broker namely, Rakesh Singh and appointed him
as dealer. Furthermore, one Raju Sahni approached Rakesh
Singh and assured that 01 Bigha, 01 Katha, 10 Dhur of land
bearing Khata No. 174, Khesra No. 342, Tauzi No. 3049, Thana
No. 36, Mauza -Rasulpur was in his mother’s possession and
said that the title was also in her favour. In this connection Raju
Sahni set up a meeting with Shila Devi (his wife), Shiv Kumar
Sahni, Jaga Sahni and Sinhashan Sahni (his brothers) with the
Company Manager Rakesh Kumar and broker -Rakesh Singh.
They assured that the land had no encumbrance and that the title
of the land wasn’t disputed. It was asserted that Phool Devi
(mother of Raju Sahni) had power to sell the land since she was
the sole owner of it. Subsequently, Phool Devi met the company
officials and the company purchased the land for Rs.
52,42,500/-. The said amount was transferred to different
accounts on different dates. Phool Devi after receiving the
money executed the sale deed in favour of the company on
25.05.2018. Later on, when the company reached out to Circle
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8883 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/5
Officer, Sonepur for mutation, it came to know that the accused
persons had lost the title of the said land in Partition Suit No.
06/2003 in the court of Munsif-3, Chapra. Furthermore, their
jamabandi was rejected by A.D.M Saran in Jamabandi
Cancellation Case No. 31/2016. The company tried to get the
refund of the money from the accused persons but the accused
refused to comply and even threatened to eliminate company
staffs and officials. The company then approached Prahlad
Sahni who was the real owner of the land and purchased the
land from him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any
offence in the manner alleged. He further submits that as per the
F.I.R. the sale deed was executed by Phool Devi and not by the
petitioners. The present case has been lodged after delay of 07
years after the execution of the sale deed and after the death of
the executant of the sale deed i.e. Phool Devi, who died on
18.02.2021. The land sold by Phool Devi was under litigation
wherein Title Appeal No. 52 / 2011 was filed in the Court of
learned District Judge, Saran which was pending adjudication
and the same was in knowledge of local broker Rakesh Singh
who took Rs. 23,00,000/- out of the sale proceeds in cash. All
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8883 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
4/5
the communications regarding land deal with the informant was
done by the broker who suppressed these facts from the
informant. The petitioners are illiterate daily wage labourers and
have falsely been implicated in the present case despite not
being the executant of the deed. The petitioners have no
criminal antecedent.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail
and submits that the petitioners are the real beneficiary and the
amount of sale proceeds was transferred to different accounts of
the petitioners on different dates.
6. Regard being had to the submission made by the
parties, taking into consideration the nature of allegation, the
fact that petitioners are not the executant of the sale deed, the
vendor (Phool Devi), who executed sale deed in question has
already died in the year 2021 and the petitioners have no
criminal antecedent, accordingly, I am inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8883 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
5/5
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Kartikey Kesharwani, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Saran at Chapra in connection with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 39
of 2025 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482
(2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…