Patna High Court
Mritunjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court confirmed the provisional bail, effectively granting regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Mritunjay Kumar was arrested in connection with a cheating case involving the informant over a promised share purchase, charged under Sections 406, 420, 341, 323 and 505 of the Indian Penal Code. He had been in custody for more than a year and was already on provisional bail granted on 16 July 2025. The petitioner applied for regular bail, arguing that the case was false and that the informant’s loss was due to share trading. The State and the informant opposed the bail, seeking an antecedent report to verify any prior convictions of the petitioner. The Court held that the matter could not be delayed merely for the informant’s verification and that the petitioner’s prolonged detention was unwarranted. Consequently, the Court allowed the application and confirmed the provisional bail, directing that the petitioner remain on the same bail bonds. The informant was permitted to file a fresh application for bail cancellation if further antecedents are proved.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the prosecution’s opposition and pending antecedent verification
- Whether prolonged pre‑trial detention of over one year is justified in the circumstances
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 406, 420, 505
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- provisional bail
- IPC
- cheating
- antecedent report
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22094 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-938 Year-2023 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Mritunjay Kumar Son of Vijay Pandit Resident of Vidyapati Colony, Behind
Patna Museum, Vijay Printing Press, P.S.- Kotwali, District - Patna, at present
resident of Block - B, Madhuri Enclave, P.S.- Digha, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vaibhav Bhargava Son of Late Ashok Bhargav Resident of 301, Basanti
Mahal Apartment, 43E, Road No. 11F, P.S.- Kadamkuan, Rajendra Nagar,
District - Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary
For the Informant : Mr. SNP Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. SP Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
8 26-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned APP for the State, and the learned Senior counsel for the
informant.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Digha P.S. Case No. 938 of 2023 registered for the offence
under Section(s) 406, 420, 341, 323 and 505 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is
accused of cheating the informant by promising the purchase of
shares. The petitioner has remained in custody for more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22094 of 2025(8) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
one year in connection with the present case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner and the informant were having a business relationship
and the informant sustained loss in share trading, this false case
has been filed.
5. Learned APP for the State and the learned Senior
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail. The learned Senior counsel for the informant submits
that the petitioner has disclosed only one antecedent but may
have more; therefore, the case may be heard after calling for the
antecedent report.
6. I have considered the submissions of the parties and
have gone through the records of the case. The petitioner is
already on provisional bail, and the parties could not settle their
dispute. The petitioner has remained in custody for more than a
year in connection with the present case. Moreover, this Court
cannot keep the matter pending solely because the informant
wishes to verify the petitioner’s antecedents.
7. In view of the foregoing discussions, this
application is allowed. Accordingly, the provisional bail,
granted to the petitioner by order dated 16.07.2025, is
hereby confirmed. The petitioner shall remain on the same bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22094 of 2025(8) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
bonds.
8. If the informant has proof of more antecedents, he
is given liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of
the petitioner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…