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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3665

PATNA HIGH COURT
Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Sheela Kumari @ Kumari Sheela – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1067 of 2026 | PS. Case No.-1830 Year-2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Ms. Riya Raj, Mr. Amarshakti
For the Respondents: Mr. Ram Anurag Singh

The legitimacy of anticipatory bail is supported by the petitioner's clean antecedents and the civil nature of the dispute.

Headnote:This case involves an anticipatory bail application under Sections 420, 468, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner claims that she is the rightful owner of the land, asserting that the dispute is civil in nature and that she is falsely implicated by the developer. The Court, considering the nature of accusation and the petitioner's clean antecedents, grants bail. The primary issue is the legitimacy of the accusations. The Court concludes that the conditions for granting anticipatory bail are met, allowing bail subject to certain terms.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 22-01-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 468 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. As per the complaint case, the accused persons, including this petitioner, in criminal conspiracy, dishonestly executed sale deed by claiming right and title over the parking space of the complainant and sold the same.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the only daughter-in-law of the actual owner of the land in question, i.e. Shanti Devi and complainant is the developer. The land in question is not related to the complainant rather it is the complainant who in order to capture whole land of the petitioner falsely implicated her in the present case. It is further submitted that from land revenue receipts of the year 2008 and 2024 it is crystal clear that portion measuring 24.83 decimal on which the agreement has been executed and the land left in question measuring 7.73 decimal belongs to Shanti Devi. Moreover, dispute involves sale and purchase of land between developer and owner of the land which is purely civil in nature and has been given colour of criminality only with a view to harass the petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. Considering backdrop of the case, nature of accusation and clean antecedent, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event of her arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail- bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC-XII, Patna in connection with Complaint Case No. 1830 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

(Prabhat Kumar 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