IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1976 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2021 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - JHANJHARPUR District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1. Hare Ram Ray Deepak @ Hareram Ray @ Deepak Ray Son of Late Siya Ram Ray R/o Village - Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani. 2. Mahesh Kumar Roy @ Mahesh Ray Son of Sri Baleshwar Ray R/o Village - Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani. 3. Suman Kumar Roy @ Suman Kumar Ray Son of Late Rajeshwar Rai R/o Village - Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Heet Narayan Jha Son of Late Chandehwar Jha R/o Village - Jamailla, P.S. - Rudrapur, District - Madhubani. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ramchandra Jha Raman, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a complaint case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 466, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1976 of 2026(3) dt.13-03-2026 2/4 29.02.2020, all the named accused persons, including these petitioners, under a conspiracy, forged a sale deed and got the land appertaining to Old Khata No. 87, Old Khesra No. 957, Rakba- 9 Dhur and Khesra No. 960, Rakha- 1 kattha and 3 dhur and Khesra No. 962/1755, Rakba- 5 dhur and new Khesra No. 2486, which belongs to the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 and his cousin brother, registered in their name from the Registry Office, Jhanjharpur. It is further alleged that the sellers of the said sale deed are Mahakant Roy, Shrikant Ray, Shiv Kant Roy, Virankant Roy and Sanjay Kant Roy, however, in the village Jamaila, no persons with such name exists. In the sale deed, the mobile number of the seller is given as 62030829, however, the said mobile number is registered in the name of Petitioner No. 2. Thus, all the named accused persons, including these petitioners, cheated the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 and got his land executed in their name without any right, title or possession. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, on 05.04.1971, ancestor of these petitioners, namely Madhukar Roy, purchased 1 kattha 12 dhur land in question from one Mallik Roy through Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1976 of 2026(3) dt.13-03-2026 3/4 registered sale deed of gift, copy of which is Annexure-P2 to this bail application. The remaining 1 kattha 12 dhur of land was purchased by these petitioners from the descendants of late Kalika Dutt who is brother of Mallik Roy. From bare perusal of the genealogical table it will be evident that Kalika Dutt has two sons, namely Fakir Rai and Kameshwar Rai. Fakir Rai died issueless and thus, his entire share ended up with Kameshwar Rai. Kameshwar Rai has five sons, namely Mahakant Roy, Shrikant Ray, Shiv Kant Roy, Vishnukant Roy and Kant Lal Roy. Kant Lal Roy died and left his share with his son, namely Sanjay Kumar Rai and the sale deed in question was executed by the four sons and one grandson of late Kameshwar Rai. The petitioners have also filed a title suit bearing Title Suit No. 48 of 2021 and the said title suit has been admitted and complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 is also one of the defendants in the said title suit. Moreover, the dispute is with regard to sale and purchase of land which is purely civil in nature and none of the acts, allegedly committed by these petitioners, would give rise to any criminal liability. Petitioners claim clean antecedents. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1976 of 2026(3) dt.13-03-2026 4/4 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of dispute and clean antecedents of the petitioners, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed. 7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jhanjharpur in connection with Complaint Case No. 43 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.. shashank/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T