Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sahdeo RayversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to provisional bail subject to conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioner, Sahdeo Ray, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging misappropriation of Rs. 18,25,000 under Sections 409 and 34 IPC. He contended that his son forged his signature and misappropriated the funds, and that a substantial portion of the amount has already been repaid following a bail order granted to his son. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., ordered provisional bail for the petitioner, subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and several conditions including repayment of the remaining amount, presence in court, and verification of criminal antecedents. The bail will be confirmed if the full amount is deposited as per the earlier order. The order was disposed, and the court clarified that its observations would not affect the trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory/provisional bail under Section 438 CrPC in view of the alleged offences under Sections 409 and 34 IPC.
  • Whether the petitioner’s claim of being a victim of his son’s forgery affects the bail considerations.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • provisional bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Section 482 B.N.S.S.
  • IPC 409
  • IPC 34
  • misappropriation
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68975 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2024 Thana- Bhalpatti District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Sahdeo Ray Son of LakhanPati Ray son of Lakhan Pati Ray, Resident of
                 Village -Manoripur,P.S.- Kusheshwarasthan, Dist. -Darbhanga, Bihar, Pin -
                 848213.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Anmol Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   21-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with

                   Bhalpatti P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024 registered for the offences

                   under Sections 409 and 34 of the I.P.C.

                                3. As per the prosecution story, the allegation upon the

                   petitioner is that he in connivance with his son, has

                   misappropriated the amount of Rs. 18,25,000/-.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner      has     no     concern       whatsoever         with     the        said

                   misappropriation and in fact, he admits to the fact that it was his

                   son who has forged his signature and misappropriated the said

                   amount. However, out of the said amount, Rs. 12,75,000/- has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68975 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
                                            2/4




          been paid back till date in view of the order passed by a co-

          ordinate Bench in the bail application preferred by the son of the

          petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the

          copy of the said bail order dated 10.09.2025 passed in Criminal

          Miscellaneous No. 41883 of 2025 and from perusal of the same,

          it seems that the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted

          that the rest of the amount would be deposited within six

          months in six equal installments and therefore the petitioner

          therein, namely, Arvind Kumar Ray, son of the present

          petitioner, was released on provisional bail till the entire amount

          is deposited with the court below. He further submits that the

          petitioner himself is a victim of the misdeeds of his son,

          however, he is also arranging money and to enable him to repay

          the entire amount he needs protection.

                       5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

          the prayer for anticipatory bail.

                       6. In view of the above, let the petitioner be released

          on provisional bail in connection with Bhalpatti P.S. Case No.

          12 of 2024, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned

          Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68975 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
                                            3/4




          Court below where the case is pending/successor court subject

          to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code

          of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2)

          of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the condition that if the entire

          amount is deposited within the period specified in the aforesaid

          order, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner shall be

          confirmed and with further conditions that:

                       (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his

          close relative.

                       (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in

          Court on each date of the trial.

                       (iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in

          violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner

          will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

                       (iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar

          nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to

          move for cancellation of his bail bond.

                       (v) The learned 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
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68975 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
                                                       4/4




                     above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in

                     the name of verification.

                                  7. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of.

                                  8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made

                     in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.



                                              (Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-

U


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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