Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Amarkant Kumar @ Ravi Kant @ Amar KanthversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court upheld its earlier order and denied bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Amarkant Kumar, sought regular bail for an alleged cheating case involving Rs. 46 lakh against a self‑help group, charged under IPC sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 34. The petition is the second attempt after a prior bail application was rejected on 16‑09‑2025. The prosecution contended that the offence involved a large amount of money, justifying continued custody. The court examined whether there were any fresh grounds to revisit its earlier order. Finding none, the court held that the earlier decision stands. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed and the petitioner remains in custody.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in a case involving cheating of Rs. 46 lakh under IPC sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 34.
  • Whether the earlier order denying bail can be reviewed on the second application.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • cheating
  • IPC
  • review of order

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25680 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2025 Thana- HISUWA District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Amarkant Kumar @ Ravi Kant @ Amar Kanth Son of Anil Kebat Resident of
                 Badi Takiya Kala, Ward No. 51, P.S. - Deepnagar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Satyendra Prasad
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-05-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail

                   in connection with Hisua P.S. Case No. 168 of 2025 registered

                   for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468/34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code.

                                3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was

                   rejected on 16.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 46883 of 2025 which

                   reads as follows:-

                                                          Heard     the learned counsel for the
                                              petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and
                                              learned APP for the State.
                                                           2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
                                              with Hisua P.S. Case No. 168 of 2025 registered for the
                                              offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468/34 of the
                                              Indian Penal Code.
                                                           3. As per the prosecution case, the
                                              petitioner and other named accused persons are
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25680 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                                              accused of cheating Rs. 46 lakhs from the members of
                                              self help group.
                                                            4. The petitioner is in custody since
                                              21.3.2025.
                                                            5. Considering the fact that the petitioner
                                              has committed cheating of such a huge amount, this
                                              Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
                                                            6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.



                                   4. This Court finds no ground to review its earlier

                      order. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands

                      rejected.



                                                         (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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