Patna High Court – Orders
Md. Nawab Zafar vs The State Of Bihar on 18 December, 2024
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45880 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2024 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR District-
Darbhanga
======================================================
1. Md. Nawab Zafar
2. Usman Gani
Both son of Late Sultan Ahmed
3. Shahbaj Alam Ansari @ Md. Shahbaz Alam @ Shahnawaz Alam Ansari
4. Shadab Ahmed @ Md. Shadeb Alam
Both son of Late Md. Mumtaz Ahmed
All resident of Village- Alafganj, Shivdhara PS- Lalit Narayan Mehra
University Dist- Darabhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dr. Ajaj Ahamad son of Late Md. Iliyas Village- Alafganj, Shivdhara, PS-
L.N.M.U. Dist- Darabhanga
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Ambastha, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr.Gaurav Govind, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 18-12-2024
Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners; Mr. Gaurav Govind,
learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Shailendra Kumar,
learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with
Sadar (Mabbi O.P.), Darbhanga P.S.Case No.34 of 2024
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468,
471, 420, 341, 323 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45880 of 2024(6) dt.18-12-2024
2/5
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that the allegations made in the FIR, as well
as, the fact that the petitioner nos.1 and 2 are sons of Late Md.
Sultan Ahmad and petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are sons of Late Md.
Mumtaz Ahmad and the informant is their own uncle, who are
claiming their right of possession over a piece of land measuring
6 katha and 8 dhur appertaining to Revisional Survey Khata
No.276 & 806 corresponding Cadestral Survey Khata no.10,
Khesra No.579 and 580. The dispute is purely civil in nature.
Learned counsel further submits that he has not brought all the
evidences on record. He also submits that a sale-deed was
executed on 03.01.2024 and the sale-deed produced by the
petitioners is of the year, 1948. The matter being purely civil in
nature, petitioners seek to be released on bail.
4. Mr. Gaurav Govind, learned counsel for the
informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-
arrest bail to the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners
have fraudulently sold the land, which is belonging to the
informant, as such, the petitioners do not deserve to be released
on pre-arrest bail. He further submits that the allegation has
been levelled against the petitioners under Sections 467, 468,
471, 420, 341, 323 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45880 of 2024(6) dt.18-12-2024
3/5
therefore, he can not be absolved from the criminal prosecution.
Learned counsel also informs that the gift of the land was
executed by the father of the informant, Md. Iliyas in favour of
the informant and his brother Dr. Aizaz Ahmad and the land is
also mutated in the name of the informant. He further informs
that T.S.No.108 of 2018 is pending.
5. Considering the nature of allegation, it appears that
the dispute is purely civil dispute and the parties have remedy
before the appropriate civil court. It has also been informed by
the parties that a Title Suit bearing No.108 of 2018 is pending
before the court of learned Sub Jude-I, Darbhanga. The law
relating to such dispute is well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Bimla Tiwari vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
[SLP (Crl.) Nos. 834-835 of 2023] and I find it gainful to
reproduce the law laid down in paragraphs no. 9, 10 and 11, as
follows : –
“9. We have indicated on more than one
occasion that the process of criminal law,
particularly in matters of grant of bail, is not akin
to money recovery proceedings but what has been
noticed in the present case carries the peculiarities
of its own.
10. We would reiterate that the process of
criminal law cannot be utilised for arm-twisting
and money recovery, particularly while opposing
the prayer for bail. The question as to whether pre-
arrest bail, or for that matter regular bail, in a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45880 of 2024(6) dt.18-12-2024
4/5given case is to be granted or not is required to be
examined and the discretion is required to be
exercised by the Court with reference to the
material on record and the parameters governing
bail considerations. Putting it in other words, in a
given case, the concession of pre-arrest bail or
regular bail could be declined even if the accused
has made payment of the money involved or offers
to make any payment; conversely, in a given case,
the concession of pre-arrest bail or regular bail
could be granted irrespective of any payment or
any offer of payment.
11. We would further emphasize that, ordinarily,
there is no justification in adopting such a course
that for the purpose of being given the concession
of pre-arrest bail, the person apprehending arrest
ought to make payment. Recovery of money is
essentially within the realm of civil proceedings.”
6. The allegations being purely civil in nature. I find
that the petitioners have made out a prima facie case to be
released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The learned district court is directed to release the
petitioners on record to adjudicate the matter on behalf of the
petitioners. The petitioners are directed to be released on pre-
arrest bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the
learned district court within a period of four weeks from today,
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 CJM, Darbhanga/concerned court, in connection with
Sadar (Mabbi OP), Darbhanga P.S.Case No.34 of 2024, subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45880 of 2024(6) dt.18-12-2024
5/5
to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. The learned district court is directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that the
petitioners are involved in some other cases as what has been
stated in paragraph No.3 of the bail application, this order will
automatically lose its force.
9. This Court has not passed any order on merit of the
dispute rather simply on the ground that the dispute is purely
civil in nature.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U