IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20995 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2006 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1. Krishna Singh S/O Ayodhya Singh R/O Village- Karma, P.S.- Surjpura, District- Rohtas 2. Ramji Singh S/O Ayodhya Singh R/O Village- Karma, P.S.- Surjpura, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Satyendra Kumar Village Goshaldih PS suryapura District Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Krishna Nishant, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 02-04-2026 Heard Mr. Gopal Krishna Nishant, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Md. Aslam Ansari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. Petitioners seeks bail who are in custody since 19.01.2026 in connection with Complaint Case No. 174 of 2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 471/34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. According to prosecution case, the informant, namely, Satyendra Kumar alleged that the petitioners took money from him in the name of registry of land but did not do the same. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20995 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026 2/3 4. Earlier the petitioners had been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.08.2008 in Cr. Misc. No. 28890 of 2008 but they could not fill up the bail bond in the said case. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners on instructions fairly submits that petitioners are ready to pay Rs. 1,33,000/- to the complainant at the time of furnishing bail bond. 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel for the Informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with Complaint Case No. 174 of 2006, subject to the following conditions:- i. At the time of furnishing bail bond, the petitioners shall produce a demand draft of Rs. 1,33,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Three Thousand) in favour of the complainant and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20995 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026 3/3 learned court below is directed to handover the said demand draft to the complainant or his representative. ii. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. iii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. iv. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. Suruchi/- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) U T