Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pramod KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court held that the petitioner, not being a signatory to the agreement and not named in the FIR, is entitled to bail and therefore granted bail on condition of bond and sureties.

Summary

Pramod Kumar, an employee of Dalitum Care Industries, was implicated in a fraud case (PS Case No. 343 of 2025) under Sections 316(4) and 318(4) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act, 2023. The prosecution alleged that an informant paid Rs. 7,50,000 to the company for a godown lease but the amount remained unpaid. The petitioner argued that his name does not appear in the FIR, he did not sign the agreement, and the main accused Harsh Kumar and Sanjay Kumar had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, but the court considered that the petitioner’s involvement was peripheral and that he was merely an employee. Consequently, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Sections 316(4) and 318(4) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act, 2023 despite being implicated in the investigation.
  • Whether the petitioner’s lack of participation in the agreement and absence from the FIR preclude the grant of bail.

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Sections 316
  • Sections 318
  • Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act
  • FIR
  • co-accused

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14074 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2025 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Pramod Kumar Son of Ram Bahadur Mahto Resident of village- Shitalpur,
                 Ps- Dighwara, Saran Bihar

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Madan Mohan
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Prem Kumar Jha
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   15-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in Nawada P.S. Case No.

                   343 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under

                   Sections-316(4) & 318(4) of the BNS, 2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that in

                   pursuant to an advertisement, issued by Dalitum Care Industries

                   OPC Pvt. Ltd. requiring a godown in Nawada along with an

                   investment, of Rs. 7,50,000/- and for that, they will be paid Rs.

                   1,00,000/- as return till 36 months. It is further alleged that the

                   informant deposited Rs 5,50,000 through bank and Rs.

                   2,00,000/- through cash, total Rs. 7,50,000/- to Dalitum Care

                   and pursuant to the payment, an agreement was also prepared. It

                   is further alleged that a total amount of Rs. 33,50,000/- of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14074 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          informant is dues with Dalitum Care which he has not received

          till date.

                       4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

          that from perusal of the FIR, it will transpire that the petitioner

          is not named in the FIR and his name surfaced in the present

          case during investigation as because he was an employee of that

          company. It has further been submitted that no agreement

          whatsoever was executed by the petitioner. It has further been

          submitted that the petitioner is neither the owner of the company

          in question nor he is signatory of the agreement. It has also been

          submitted that the main accused persons namely Harsh Kumar

          and Sanjay Kumar have already been granted bail by a

          coordinate bench of this court as they have given undertaking

          that within 60 days of release, they shall start clearing all the

          amount by paying Rs. Twenty though per month by 10th of every

          month. It has further beenf submitted that the main thrust of

          allegation was against co-accused Harsh Kumar and Sanjay

          Kumar who have already been granted bail by a coordinate

          bench of this court by order dated 15-11-2025 passed in Cr.

          Misc. No. 44992 of 2025. The case of the petitioner stands on

          better footing and he is under custody since 21-04-2025.

                       5. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14074 of 2026(3) dt.15-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      for bail.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                      let the petitioner named above, 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 learned Chief Judicial

                      Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Nawada P.S. Case No.

                      343 of 2025.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
A.K.V.//-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.