IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10778 of 2024 Chandra Shekhar Kumar, age- 56 years, S/o late Naresh Prasad Singh @ late Naresh Pradesh Singh, R/o H.No.-43, Diwakar Nagar, P.O.- Bariyatu, P.S.- Sadar, Dist- Ranchi. … Petitioner - Versus - The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party ------ CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P. --- 05/30.01.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No.84 of 2023, corresponding to G.R. No.1397 of 2024, for the offences registered under Sections 419, 420, 467,468,471,474,427,452,506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Shri Ram Kumar Lal Gupta, learned JMFC, Ranchi. The informant is the brother of one Prashant Kumar Ghosh who is the owner of the land appertaining to Khata Nos.10, plot no.142 and Khata No.11, plot No.160, total area 2 acres 55 decimals. Prashant Kumar Ghosh executed power of attorney in the name of the informant. It is alleged that the named accused persons had entered into criminal conspiracy and fake power of attorney was prepared purportedly showing it to be issued by Prashant Kumar Ghosh in the name of the present petitioner. On the basis of fake power of attorney, the portion of the aforesaid land was transferred to several persons. It is also alleged that the purchasers had demolished the wall of the land in order to take its possession. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Prashant Kumar Ghosh is still in possession of the said land. It was further submitted that entire sale deed was merely a paper transaction and the possession of the land was not transferred to purchasers. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but admitted that the land in question is still in possession of the informant. -2- Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2006) 5 SCC 353, wherein it was held that when the document is valid no question arises of its cancellation. When the document is void ab initio, a decree for setting aside the same would not be necessary as the same is non est in the eye of the law, as it would be a nullity. It is admitted that the sale deed executed by the accused persons is void ab initio, as such, the right, title and possession of the actual owner has not come under cloud. In view of the submission made above, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Shri Ram Kumar Lal Gupta, learned JMFC, Ranchi or his successor, in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No.84 of 2023, corresponding to G.R. No.1397 of 2024. (Ambuj Nath, J.) Jay/-