Patna High Court – Orders
Ramesh Lal Das vs The State Of Bihar on 11 August, 2025
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22195 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2024 Thana- PRATAPGANJ District- Supaul
======================================================
Ramesh Lal Das S/O Late Badri Lal Das Resident of Village- Pluwaha, Ward
No. 03, P.S- Jadia, Distt.- Supaul (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Munmun Pandey D/o Padam Chand Pandey, R/o Akeenpada, Damodar
Bhawan, Netaji Road, P.S. Jiyaganj, District- Murshidabad, West Bengal, at
present R/0 Vill- Bhawanipur south, ward no. 7, P.S.- Pratapganj, Distt-
Supaul
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-08-2025
Despite of entered appearance through Vakalatnama,
no one appears on behalf of the Informant.
2. Heard Mr. Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the
State.
3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024, F.I.R.
dated 10.07.2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 467, 468, 420, 120B, 354, 323, 504 of the Indian Penal
Code and based on the complaint petition by the informant, the
SDJM refer the matter to police under Section 156(3) of the
Criminal Procedure Code and the present F.I.R. was instituted.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22195 of 2025(3) dt.11-08-2025
2/6
4. The prosecution case as per the informant
Munmun Panday is that her father Padam Chand Panday is 90
years old and has no son, so he used to leave with his daughter
at Murshidabad, West Bengal. It is stated that the informant used
to take care of the house and landed property belonging to her
father situated at village-Jiyaganj, Pratapganj, Supaul. It is
stated that 3 Kattha 9 Dhur land of Khesra 3933 under Khata
201 situated at Mauja Bhavanipur, Thana No. 151 is self
acquired property of informants father, which is in his peaceful
possession and is registered in his name in Jamabandi Register-
II in Jamabandi No. 673. The informant gave money to accused
Bijay Panday for paying the rent from the year 2016-17 to the
year 2021-22. The accused obtained the rent receipt, as required
and gave it to the informant. There after the accused Bijay
Panday, with intention to grave informant’s valuable land and
house, in collusion with the accused Kali Charan Gothi, Niraj
Kumar and the then Halka Karmchari Ramesh Lal Das & Rahul
Kumar and also the then C.O.-Pratapganj Anshu Kumar and the
computer operator Amit Kumar Singh committed forgery in the
Register-II in Jamabandi No. 673 and interpolated the name of
Damodar in place of Padam Chand and also interpolated the
area 2 Kattha 6 Dhur in place of 3 Kattha 9 Dhur. It is also used
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22195 of 2025(3) dt.11-08-2025
3/6
that then C.O. Anshu Kumar also forged and interpolated the
above mentioned interpolation in the online records of the said
land from his dongal and then after entering the forged online
Jamabandi issued forged rent receipts in the name of Late
Damodar Panday. When the informant came to know about the
said forgery committed by the accused person, she asked the
accused Bijay Panday about it but he started abusing and
assaulting the informant in presence of the witnesses. Is stated
that the accused Bijay Panday has earlier also committed
offence against the informant for which Pratapganj P.S. case No.
218/23 is registered against him.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner having clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
As per allegation, in the F.I.R., the accused persons including
the petitioner altering the owner’s name of Damodar Pandey and
reducing the recorded area to 2 Katha 6 Dhur in the Register-II.
In fact, the petitioner was Halka Karamchari and as per
allegation in the F.I.R. the alleged occurrence had taken place
between April 2023 and 09th May, 2023 and petitioner had given
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22195 of 2025(3) dt.11-08-2025
4/6
the charge of the newly appointed Halka Karamchari namely
Rahul Kumar on 21.02.2023 which suggests that on the date of
occurrence the petitioner was not serving as a Halka Karmchari
in Circle Office, Pratapganj and he has handed over all the
records to said Rahul Kumar two months prior of the alleged
offence as alleged in the F.I.R. In fact, the petitioner is a retired
Government servant and is currently working on a contract basis
and throughout his service, he has maintained an unblemished
record and no complaints or allegations of misconduct have ever
been made against him. In fact, the petitioner is not the
beneficiary of the alleged occurrence and the beneficiary of the
alleged occurrence is other co-accused persons namely Niraj
Kumar, Bijay Pandey @ Bijoy Pandey and Kalicharan Gothi
and they have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by
this Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
26324 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 10296 of 2025.
6. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and
he has been transferred from the place of occurrence before the
date of occurrence and he has handed over all the records to his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22195 of 2025(3) dt.11-08-2025
5/6
Successor namely Rahul Kumar on 21.02.2023 itself and
similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted the
privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court, let the petitioner,
above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of thirty days from the date of
receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Birpur in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No.
128 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section
482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22195 of 2025(3) dt.11-08-2025
6/6any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T