SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4580

PATNA HIGH COURT
S. B. Pd. Singh, J
Barun Kumar Biyogi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82829 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Santosh Kumar Singh
For the Respondents: Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma

Anticipatory bail granted where no criminal offence is established and the matter is primarily civil in nature.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Chitragupta Nagar P.S. Case No. 14 of 2025 for offences under various sections of BNS. The allegations involve fraudulent sale of land to co-accused; however, the Court finds no criminal offence made out against the petitioner and frames the issue as a civil dispute. The Court grants bail based on the petitioner’s clean antecedents and lack of charges against him.

Result: The petitioner is granted anticipatory bail.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 01-12-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Chitragupta Nagar P. S. Case No. 14 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 329(3), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS.

3. As per FIR, allegation against the petitioner-Barun Kumar Viyogi is to sell the land (area 21.80 decimal) of informant fraudulently to one Punam Devi and Rekha Devi on 27.06.2024 through registered sale deed no. 2765 and 2764 respectively.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with malicious intention. He further submits that petitioner has sold his own land to co-accused Punam Devi and Rekha Devi, as jamabandi of the land in question is running in the name of petitioner. He also submits that informant has not filed any civil suit against kewala\deed no. 2765 and 2764 before any competent court for declaring them as null and void so, this fact shows that alleged sale deed has not wrongly been executed by the petitioner. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail application.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. After going through the record and considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties, it clearly transpires that no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner, moreover, it is a civil dispute between the parties.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and considering the clean antecedent of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Chitragupta Nagar P. S. Case No. 14 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of BNSS .

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top