Arvind Kumar Yadav @ Arbind Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73466 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2024 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Arvind Kumar Yadav @ Arbind Kumar Yadav S/o Dineshwar Prasad Yadav
                 the Khagaria District Central Co-operative Bank Limited Branch Mansi
                 Distt.- Khagaria, at present R/o vill - Balha, P.S.- Narayanpur via Naugachia,
                 Distt.- Bhagalpur
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Bablu Yadav S/o Late Rajdeo Prasad Yadav R/o vill- Khutiya, P.S.- Mansi,
                  Distt.- Khagaria
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, APP
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Ranjeet Patel, Adv.
                                                  Mr. Avnish Kumar Singh, Adv.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-02-2026                  Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned

                   APP for the State as well as the learned Advocate for the

                   informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Mansi P.S. Case No.167 of 2024 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 467, 468, 406, 409, 120B/34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code.

                                3. Based upon the complaint case, it is alleged that the

                   complainant was a shopkeeper who used to deposit Rs.500 per

                   day under the Daily Deposit Scheme in the Khagaria District

                   Central Cooperative Bank Limited through one agent, namely

                   Mithilesh Kumar. In total, the complainant deposited Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73466 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                            2/3




          4,70,176/- but the amount has not been actually deposited in the

          Bank and when the complainant asked for returning the amount,

          the same has been refused. The petitioner is said to be the

          Branch Manager of the Cooperative Bank.

                       4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that

          there is a specific accusation in the complaint petition that the

          savings account of the informant was opened on 09.06.2023,

          and he deposited the amount to the tune of Rs. 4,70,146/-

          through one agent, namely Mithilesh Kumar and, as such, the

          entire allegation revolves around co-accused Mithilesh Kumar.

          There is no whisper or any allegation that the petitioner has

          anyhow accepted the amount or operated the account of the

          complainant; rather, the fact is otherwise. The petitioner had

          already superannuated from the post of Branch Manager of the

          Cooperative Bank on 31.03.2023, much before the opening of

          the account of the complainant. The petitioner though bears two

          criminal antecedents; however, it is submitted that now he has

          already superannuated and he undertakes that he will fully

          cooperate in the proceedings of the Court.

                       5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State

          and the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and

          submitted that co-accused Mithilesh Kumar is none else but the

          agent, who was duly appointed by the petitioner while he was
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73466 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                        discharging his duty as a Branch Manager and, as such, the

                        entire amount has been defalcated in collusion with the

                        petitioner.

                                      6. Having considered the submissions advanced by

                        the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note

                        of the fact that prior to the opening of the account by the

                        complainant, the petitioner had already superannuated, and there

                        is neither any material nor allegation against the petitioner of

                        defalcation or of taking the alleged deposited money, let the

                        petitioner be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or

                        surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four

                        weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

                        thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                        satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Khagaria in

                        connection with Mansi P.S. Case No.167 of 2024, subject to the

                        condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with

                        further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close

                        family members of the petitioner.



                                                    (Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-

U         T