Patna High Court
Nitish Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to the conditions imposed by the Court.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a case involving alleged defalcation of public food grains and offences under Sections 406, 409 and 420 IPC. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was initially listed only as a witness, and that similarly situated co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail by the same court. The State and the District Manager of the State Food Corporation opposed the bail. The Court considered the petitioner’s clean record, the fact that he was not originally named in the FIR, and the precedent of bail granted to co‑accused, and consequently ordered that he be released on bail if arrested or surrendered within thirty days, subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC. The bail order includes conditions of cooperation with the trial, non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedent by the lower court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC given his clean antecedent and initial status as a witness.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused in similar circumstances warrants a similar order for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- false implication
- food grain defalcation
- IPC 406
- IPC 409
- IPC 420
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36045 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-147 Year-2022 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN District-
Darbhanga
======================================================
Nitish Kumar Singh Son of Nagendra Singh Resident of Village- Dune
Buzurg, Police Station. Darauli, District-Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The District Manager, State Food Corporation, Darbhanga. Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
For the BSFC : Mr. Niraj Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-07-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Niraj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant
and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Kusheshwar Asthan P.S. Case No. 147 of 2022,
F.I.R. dated 27.04.2022 for the offences punishable under
Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the IPC.
3. According to prosecution case, one Anshuman Rai
who was Assistant Manager is said to have defalcated Public
Food Grain i.e. 11713.84 quintal of wheat and 9158.35 quintal of
rice amounting to Rs. 6,23,43,279/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36045 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
2/3
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Initially the petitioner was not
named in the FIR. In fact, the petitioner was at serial no. 9 in the
witness column and thereafter, the petitioner has been made
accused in the present case. He further submit that the co-
accused, namely, Anshuman Rai whose name has been
incorporated in the present FIR has been granted anticipatory bail
by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2023 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 50787 of 2022 and another co-accused, namely, Hemant Jha
@ Hemant Kumar Jha has also been granted anticipatory bail by
this Court vide order dated 17.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
18006 of 2026.
5. The learned counsel for the BSFC as well as learned
Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the petitioner has clean antecedent, initially petitioner was
not named in the FIR and similarly situated co-accused has been
granted anticipatory bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above
named, in the event of 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/-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36045 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
3/3
satisfaction of the learned SDJM, Biraul at Darbhanga in
connection with Kusheshwar Asthan P.S. Case No. 147 of 2022,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following
conditions:-
i. 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.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
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)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.