2026:JHHC:13701 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 756 of 2026 ------ 1. Onkar Prasad @ Omkar Prasad, son of Lalu Sao, resident of Village Kuru, P.O. and P.S. Kuru, District Lohardaga 2. Kiran Prasad Sahu, son of Late Lalu Sahu, resident of Ward No.5, back in Bus Stand, Railway Corssing, Dhora Toli, P.O. and P.S. Lohardagar, presently residing at Village Kuru, P.O. and P.S. Kuru, District Lohardaga .... .... …. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Kushal Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Harsh Preet Singh, Advocate ------ 04/07.05.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Lohardaga P.S. Case No. 207 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 352, 61(2) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that father of the petitioners had acquired land in question situated at Mauza Kutmu under R.S. Khata No.83, Plot No.1002, area 03 decimals corresponds to new survey Khata No.75, Plot No.877, area 03 decimals by way of registered Sale Deed No.1545 dated 25.07.2013 from Prabhat Kumar Sahu. The said land was already mutated in the name of his father vide Mutation Case No.131R24/2014-15 and he was paying rent to the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that Lalu Sahu, who happens to be the father, in order to meet legal necessity, intended to sale the above property and accordingly, an agreement to sale was executed by Lalu Sahu in favour of Md. Anwar Ansari on 23.12.2014 for a consideration amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and he had received Rs.1,50,000/- as an advance from Md. Anwar Ansari. Later on, Md. Anwar Ansari had paid the balance consideration amount of Rs.50,000/- to the father of the petitioners. Later on, he died in the 2026:JHHC:13701 year 2020 leaving behind his legal heirs and successors. Since his father has received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from Md. Anwar Ansari, but he could not execute the registered deed of sale in favour of Md. Anwar Ansari and Md. Anwar Ansari has lodged Original Suit No.265 of 2020 before the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division under Specific performance of contract against Onkar Prasad, Kiran Prasad Sahu, Akshay Kumar, Abhishek Kumar and Swarnjeet Kumar and thereafter, when Onkar Prasad and Kiran Prasasd Sahu had executed the registered deed of sale in favour of Mandayal Mahto vide Deed No.905 dated 15.06.2021 as per choice of Md. Anwar Ansari showing consideration amount of Rs.2,10,000/- as per the valuation of the property though they have not received any consideration amount from the purchasers since Lalu Sahu had already received the consideration amount. In this back ground, he submits that if the case is made out that is civil in nature and one original suit is already pending and for that a criminal case has been lodged. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel for the State and the informant jointly oppose the prayer and submit that by way of suppressing genealogy, execution of the deed has been made. They submit that the informant is uncle of these petitioners and in conspiracy, they have sold the land and in view of that case of forgery is made out. On these grounds, anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Admittedly, uncle, who is the informant, has lodged the case against their nephews, who are the petitioners and allegations are made that on the forged and fabricated genealogy, execution of deed has been done, however, the facts further remains that the father of these petitioners has purchased the said land which was mutated in his name and father has already entered into an agreement of sale in his life time with Md. Anwar Ansari and in the meantime, left for his heavenly abode and thereafter, Original Suit No.265 of 2020 has been filed and with consent of Md. Anwar Ansari in absence of taking any consideration, as the amount has already been taken by the father of the petitioners, the sale deed was executed in favour of Mandayal Mahto. In the attending facts and circumstances, prima facie, it 2026:JHHC:13701 transpires that this is family dispute and for that criminal case has been lodged. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the above-named petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court within two weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga, in connection with Lohardaga P.S. Case No. 207 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Anit Uploaded 08.05.2026