Patna High Court
Ramtapasasya KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to specified conditions, under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramtapasasya Kumar, an ex‑employee of a company, was implicated in an FIR (Kotwali P.S. Case No. 265 of 2025) alleging misappropriation of Rs 8,40,852 by forging documents in collusion with others, and was charged under Sections 316(2) and 318(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. He applied for anticipatory bail, asserting that the FIR was filed due to a misunderstanding, that he has no prior criminal record, and that he is willing to make staged payments to the affected company pending the case outcome. The State opposed the relief, contending that the petitioner had siphoned the money and therefore deserved no bail. The Court examined the lack of criminal antecedent, the petitioner’s expressed willingness to pay the alleged amount, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. Finding that the petitioner’s undertaking and the circumstances justified bail, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to strict conditions, including a bail bond, sureties, and compliance with payment and conduct requirements. The order directs that the bail be effected within four weeks of arrest or surrender, and outlines consequences for breach of conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and his undertaking to pay the alleged misappropriated amount justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- misappropriation
- forgery
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68414 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2025 Thana- KOTWALI District- Patna
======================================================
Ramtapasasya Kumar Son of Bhola Singh R/O Vill.- Harsidhi, P.S.- Gai Ghat,
District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel
for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 265 of 2025 instituted under
Sections 316(2), 318(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023
lodged on 02.05.2025 by the informant,Rajesh Kumar Maharaj.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the petitioner who was an ex-employee serving as Surveyor
in the Company misappropriated Rs. 8,40,852/- against 33
vehicles by putting forward forged document in collusion with
other conspirators. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset
submits that under misunderstanding, the FIR has been lodged.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68414 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/4
The amount directly goes to the account. He has no role to play
and further has no criminal antecedent. Last submission is that
he being the employee of the said Company and to show his
bonafide, is ready to pay the amount by way of Demand Draft to
the Go Digit Insurance Company, Patna subject to the final
outcome of the present case in the following manner, if the relief
is extended to him:
(i) Rs.2,00,000/- at the time of executing
the bail bonds;
(ii) Rs.1,00,000/- each (totalling
Rs.2,00,000/-) by 10th of March, 2026
and 10th April, 2026;
(iii) Rs.50,000/- each (totalling
Rs.4,00,000/-) by 10th of every month
from May, June, July, August, September,
October, November and December, 2026;
(iv) Rs.40,852/- by 10th January, 2027;
5. The further submission is that failure by the
petitioner to abide by it, the Company shall be free to take steps
for cancellation of bail bonds.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68414 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/4
despite being an employee of that Company, he siphoned of the
money and as such deserves no relief.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties, FIR is
there, this Court has taken note of the fact that the petitioner has
no criminal antecedent, a bonafide intent has been shown by
him to make the payment as recorded above to the Company,
subject to the outcome of the present case, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory
bail subject to the undertaking that the petitioner himself as
given in the aforesaid paragraph-04 and its sub-paras.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the concerned court within a
period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.
265 of 2025 to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Patna subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other conditions.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Driving License/Voter ID/Pan Card
etc.) to show his/her bona fide;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68414 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
4/4
(ii) the petitioner shall make himself available before
the Investigating Officer as and when required for smooth
conclusion of the investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…