Patna High Court
Dilip KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court ordered interim pre‑arrest bail for the petitioner, subject to mediation and appearance before the District Court, and disposed of the application.
Summary
Dilip Kumar applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case (PS‑380/2025) alleging land fraud involving forged identity documents and threats. The FIR alleges that the accused induced the informant to purchase land, paid most of the consideration in cash, and used forged documents. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, the dispute is purely civil, and he seeks mediation and bail. The State argued that the matter involves criminal elements. The High Court, citing Supreme Court precedents, held that the dispute appears civil in nature and directed that the petitioner be given interim protection through pre‑arrest bail, subject to appearance before the District Court and mediation, with bail to be confirmed by the District Court. The application was disposed with directions for mediation and conditional bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail in a case involving alleged land fraud and forgery.
- Whether the dispute is essentially civil and thus warrants quashing or staying criminal proceedings.
- Whether mediation is an appropriate remedy before proceeding with criminal trial.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 316(2), 318(4), 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- land fraud
- civil dispute
- mediation
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- abuse of process
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89482 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-380 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Dilip Kumar Son of Surendra Prasad R/o Village - Chanda, P.S. - Athmalgola,
Dist. - Patna, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Richa, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Asha Kumari, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Bindhyachal Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Aakash Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 23-04-2026 Heard Ms. Richa, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, learned Senior
counsel along with Mr. Aakash Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of informant and Ms. Asha Kumari, learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 380/2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 316(2),318(4),3(5), of the
BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant was induced by the accused persons to purchase 10
kathas of land for Rs. 90 lakhs, out of which about Rs. 79 lakhs
was paid, and a sale deed was executed, however, it was later
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89482 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
2/6
discovered that part of the land was not validly transferred and
that forged identity documents were used during registry, and
upon protest, the accused persons abused, threatened and fired
at the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has
falsely been implicated in the present case. The entire dispute
arises out of a land transaction and is purely civil in nature.
Learned counsel further submitted that as per the materials
available on record, only a limited amount was transacted
through bank accounts, whereas, the major portion of the
alleged consideration is stated to have been paid in cash at the
place of the informant. The petitioner’s role was confined only
to transfer of his share of land and he had no concern with the
alleged impersonation. The sale deed reflects a much lesser
consideration amount and the allegations have been exaggerated
with an ulterior motive to harass and extort money. The
petitioner has clean antecedent. The matter primarily relates to
monetary transaction between the parties and for amicable
settlement of dispute between the parties outside the Court, the
matter be referred for mediation.
5. Per contra, learned Senior counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89482 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
3/6
behalf of the Informant and learned APP appearing on behalf of
the State submitted that a chance be given to the parties for
amicable settlement outside the court.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has
agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M.
on 04.05.2026.
7. Heard the parties
8. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the F.I.R., I am of the opinion that an opportunity is
required to be given to the parties to settle their score amicably
outside the Court.
9. In this regard, I find it apt to take note of the
observation made by the Apex Court in case of Paramjeet
Batra v. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2013) 11 SCC 673,
in which, the Apex Court in paragraph no. 12 has held as
follows:
"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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89482 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
4/6
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."
(emphasis supplied)
10. The Apex Court has reiterated the aforesaid
proposition in recent judgment of S. N. Vijayalakshmi & Ors.
vrs. The State of Karnataka and Anr. reported in (2025) SCC
Online SC 1575.
11. The petitioner has willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on or before 04.05.2026, so
that the matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
12. Learned District Court is directed to issue notice
to O.P. No.2 and take necessary steps to refer the matter before
the learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center by fixing
a date for appearance of the parties to give effect to “Mediation
for the Nation 2.0”.
13. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned, upon appearance of the parties, shall make his/her
best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and thereafter 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 in connection with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89482 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
5/6
aforesaid case.
14. 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 hereinabove, the petitioner is
required to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
15. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 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.
16. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
complainant to reconcile, then in that case, the interim
protection granted to the petitioner shall continue and the trial
shall proceed in accordance with law.
17. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner
is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
18. If both the parties arrive at amicable settlement,
then they must withdraw the criminal cases, if any, which they
have lodged against each other.
19. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89482 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
6/6
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…