Patna High Court

CHANDESHWARI KAMATversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 4 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Chandeshwari Kamat, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS 110 of 2021) alleging offences under Sections 409 and 201 of the IPC for allegedly failing to deposit case records for four years after his posting. The prosecution contended that the omission amounted to criminal breach of trust of government documents. The petitioner argued that at most the lapse was administrative and did not constitute an offence, and pleaded innocence. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of a breach of trust. The Patna High Court, without delving into the merits, refused the anticipatory bail application but directed the trial court to entertain a regular bail application if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, allowing the trial court to decide on merit thereafter.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case alleging criminal breach of trust under Section 409 IPC and disappearance of evidence under Section 201 IPC.
Whether the alleged administrative lapse of not depositing case records amounts to an offence under the IPC.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 409

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal breach of trust
Section 409 IPC
Section 201 IPC
administrative lapse
bail proceedings
Patna High Court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5049 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2021 Thana- CHIKSAUR District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Chandeshwari Kamat S/O Maheshwri Kamat R/O Surmaha Kishanpur, Ps-
                 Sour Bazar, District- Saharsa

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Shiva Shankar Sharma, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Lalan Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   04-02-2026                      Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and

                   Learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Chiksaura P.S. Case No. 110 of 2021 lodged on

                   13.10.2021, for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and

                   201 of the IPC, which is pending before the Court of Judicial

                   Magistrate-1st Class, Hilsa.

                                3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

                   the petitioner with allegation that during his period of posting,

                   he had not deposited the case record to the police station even

                   after lapse of 4 years, it is due to this reason, the present FIR has

                   been filed.

                                4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5049 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                            2/3




          submits that on the basis of allegation itself, it does not transpire

          any offence under IPC. He further submits that at worst, it may

          be say that it is administrative lapse and over that section 409 of

          the IPC may not be continued.

                       5. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the

          petitioner is not clean and there is one criminal case pending

          against him in which he is on bail.

                       6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail and submits that Section 409 of the IPC is basically a

          criminal breach of trust and I.O. to whom the investigation has

          been trusted and upon transfer, he has not deposited the said

          documents for 4 years and even after repeated request, he sat

          over the matter and kept those documents in his possession,

          which has been provided to him in performance of the

          Government duty. He further submits that it shall be treated as

          breach of trust with the Government.

                       7. In the present facts and circumstances and without

          entering into the merit of this case, this Court is not inclined to

          grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, therefore the bail

          application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

                       8. However, trial court is directed to consider the

          regular bail application of the petitioner, if he surrenders within
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5049 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     4 weeks from today and prays for regular bail, then trial court

                     shall pass order on merit without being prejudice of the present

                     order preferably on the same day.



                                                             (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…