Patna High Court
Harinath Mishra @ Harinath MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- S B P SINGH
Holding
The Court held that, given the petitioner’s clean antecedents and lack of proven participation in the alleged fraud, he is entitled to anticipatory bail.
Summary
Petitioner Harinath Mishra was implicated in a criminal case (Laheriyasarai PS Case No. 614 of 2023) for alleged offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC, accused of conspiring to defraud an informant of Rs. 20,00,000. He contended that he was innocent, explaining that he had sold land to a buyer who later arranged payment from the informant’s account without his knowledge, and that he had refused to deal with the informant due to his dubious reputation. The petitioner highlighted his clean antecedents and argued that he was falsely implicated. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the petitioner’s clean record and the circumstances suggesting lack of culpability, the Court granted anticipatory bail, directing release upon arrest within four weeks on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, one of whom must be a close relative, under the inherent powers of the High Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail despite the allegations under Sections 406 and 420 IPC.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the alleged fraud is sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 406
- IPC 420
- fraud
- land sale
- clean antecedents
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6040 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-614 Year-2023 Thana- LAHERIYASARAI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Harinath Mishra @ Harinath Mishra S/O Late Buddhinath Mishra R/O
Vrindavan Yojana,Lucknow P.S- SGPGI, District- Lucknow.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs.Shrishti Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Laheriyasarai P.S. Case No. 614 of 2023 for the
offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has
alleged that the all the F.I.R. named accused persons including
the present petitioner, by deceit and fraud, hatched a criminal
conspiracy to defraud him of Rs. 20,00,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The true fact of the case is that the petitioner has
refused to sell the land to the informant whom he knew as
“Mahadeva” as he had a notorious reputation, and the land was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6040 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
sold through executed sale deed to one Smt. Rashmi Kumari.
On the request of the buyer, the petitioner has accepted payment
in multiple tranches, including one payment from the account of
Rajesh Kumar Mishra, without being aware that the same was
the account of the informant. The buyer namely, Shyamanand
informed the petitioner that he was facing certain technical
difficulties in effecting the transfer to the petitioner’s bank
account and therefore, proposed to deposit the amount from the
account of one of his family members. Upon enquiry, by the
petitioner regarding such family member, Shyamananda
informed that the said person was Rajesh Kumar Mishra
(informant) and that he was his trusted aside. The petitioner was
not aware that Rajesh Kumar Mishra and Mahadeva are the
same person and petitioner has refused to enter into any
transaction with Mahadeva on account of his dubious
antecedents. As per para 3 of the bail application petitioner has
clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, and
considering the clean antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is
inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6040 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date
of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhang , in
connection with Laheriyasarai P.S. Case No. 614 of 2023
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of
B.N.S.S., as also with the condition that one of the bailors
should be close relative of the petitioner.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…