Patna High Court
Amit Kumar Tiwari @ Amit TiwariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding the allegations vague and unsupported by substantive evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Amit Kumar Tiwari, sought relief fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code concerning an alleged embezzlement of Rs. 7.98 lakh deposited with a co‑accused's cooperative society. The prosecution alleges that Tiwari, while employed at the society, issued receipts for the deposit and was complicit in the refusal to return the money. The petitioner contended that he merely issued a receipt in the presence of the informant, had no role in the society’s operations, left the job in July 2018, and that no witness testified to his involvement. He further argued that the police only pursued him after a four‑year delay despite a lack of substantive evidence, and that the co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail. The court noted the vague nature of the allegations, the absence of material evidence, and the possibility of false implication, and therefore ordered his release on bail with conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and the usual bail terms. The order also required the petitioner to appear before the trial court as directed.
Issues considered
- What is the adequacy of evidence to justify the arrest of the petitioner in the case under Sections 406 and 420 IPC?
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the vague allegations and lack of substantive material?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 406
- IPC 420
- false implication
- evidence
- receipt
- cooperative society
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16183 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2021 Thana- NASRIGANJ District- Rohtas
======================================================
Amit Kumar Tiwari @ Amit Tiwari S/o Shiv Kumar Tiwari, Resident of
Village - Karup, P.O.- Karup Indrahiyan, P.S- Sasaram Muffasil, Dist- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Nasriganj P.S. Case
No. 164 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, petitioner had been
working in C.S.P. being run by co-accused Pramod Tiwari. The
informant deposited in fixed deposit account an amount of
rupees seven lakhs and ninety-eight thousand on assurance of
co-accused that after one year of maturity, the informant would
receive the money back along with the interest. The allegation
against the petitioner is that he used to issue receipts for the
deposited money and the co-accused refused to return the
money back to the informant and drove her out and thus
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16183 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/4
embezzled the money.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. Learned counsel further submits that only allegation
against the petitioner is that the informant deposited the amount
in presence of this petitioner who was working as one of the
staff of the co-accused and issued receiving for the deposited
amount. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has
no role in running of the C.S.P. and all transactions take place
with the biometrics of the manager who runs the C.S.P. and in
the present case, he is the co-accused Pramod Tiwari. Learned
counsel further submits that, however, during investigation none
of the witnesses stated about petitioner receiving any money or
issuing any receipt. Further, the petitioner left this C.S.P. in July,
2018 and the amount deposited would have matured in the year
2019 as per the averment made in the FIR. Learned counsel
further submits that the informant has not made any allegation
against the petitioner and initially even the Police did not take
any action against the petitioner as there was no evidence
against him. But after passage of four years, the Police went in
lookout for the petitioner though there is no substantive material
against him. Learned counsel further submits that the co-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16183 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/4
accused Pramod Tiwari has been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by a learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 17.12.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36271 of
2023. The learned counsel lastly submits that the petitioner is
having antecedent of one case in which he is on bail.
5. Learned APP opposes the submissions made on
behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
vague nature of allegation against the petitioner and further
considering the lack of substantive material against the
petitioner and also considering the possibility of false
implication, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the Court concerned within a period of
eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas,
Sasaram, in connection with Nasriganj P.S. Case No. 164 of
2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16183 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
4/4
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the
learned trial Court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…