Patna High Court

Raman KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SANDEEP KUMAR

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted subject to the stipulated bail bond, sureties and the deposit of a demand draft as fixed deposit.

Summary

The petitioner, a bank branch manager, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Kinjar P.S. Case No. 112 of 2023) alleging defalcation of Rs. 4 lakh and offences under IPC sections 406, 409 and 420. He claimed innocence and willingness to return the money without admitting guilt. The High Court, after hearing counsel, allowed the bail application, directing that the petitioner be released on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482 of the BNSS. Additionally, the court required the petitioner to furnish a demand draft of Rs. 4,00,000 to be kept as a fixed deposit, to be returned to him if acquitted or to the bank if convicted. The order was issued by Justice Sandeep Kumar.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving offences under IPC sections 406, 409 and 420.
Whether the conditions imposed, including a demand draft of Rs. 4,00,000, are permissible under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482 of the BNSS.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 409, 420

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail bond
Section 438 CrPC
Section 482 CrPC
defalcation
bank manager
fixed deposit
high court order

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69372 of 2025
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2023 Thana- Kinjar District- Arwal
                 ======================================================
                 Raman Kumar S/o Late Saryu Prasad Resident of Flat No. 403, Lakhan
                 Enclave, Sharma Path, Rukanpura, P.S.- Rupaspur, District- Patna. At the
                 relvevant time posted as Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Arwal
                 Makhdumpur Branch, P.S.- Arwal, District- Arwal

                                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    Tuntun Saw S/o- Rajendra Saw, Sushma Bastralaya, Kinjar, P.S.- Kinjar,
                 Dist.-Arwal

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Ravi Prakash Dwivedi
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma
                                                   Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   09-03-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                    2.        The petitioner apprehends his arrest in

                   connection with Kinjar P.S. Case No. 112 of 2023 registered for

                   the offence under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal

                   Code.

                                    3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner, who

                   is Branch Manager of Union Bank, is alleged to have defalcated

                   Rs. 4 lakhs from the informant.

                                    4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69372 of 2025(5) dt.09-03-2026
                                            2/3




          the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely

          been implicated in this case. He further submits that the

          petitioner is ready to return the alleged defalcated amount to the

          informant without accepting his guilt.

                          5. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application

          is allowed.

                           6. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of

          his arrest or surrender before the concerned Court below within

          four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

          like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial

          Magistrate, Arwal/concerned Court below in connection with

          Kinjar P.S. Case No. 112 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid

          down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

          1973 / Section 482 of the BNSS.

                          7. As a condition of this order, the petitioner, at the

          time of furnishing his bail bonds, will produce a demand draft of

          Rs. 4,00,000/- and then only his bail bonds shall be accepted. It

          is made clear that the demand draft shall be kept in fixed deposit

          by the Court below and the same shall be released in favour of

          the petitioner or the bank, subject to the outcome of the trial i.e.

          if the petitioner is acquitted then the maturity amount of the
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69372 of 2025(5) dt.09-03-2026
                                                      3/3




                    fixed deposit shall be returned to the petitioner and if the

                    petitioner is convicted then the same shall be returned to the

                    Bank.



                                                              (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…