Patna High Court
ONKAR NATH BHARTIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The High Court held that there was no ground to interfere with the bail order and dismissed the application for its cancellation.
Summary
Onkar Nath Bharti, a branch manager of Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank, filed an application seeking cancellation of the regular bail granted to Uttam Kumar, a bank employee accused of forging documents and misappropriating Rs 11,29,987. The bail, ordered on 30‑09‑2022 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, was conditioned on a deposit of Rs 4,15,380, a bond, and compliance with investigative requirements. Bharti contended that the lower court erred in granting bail, arguing that Kumar’s role as a co‑accused differed from other accused who had been bailed. The Patna High Court examined the bail order and noted that it expressly allowed the prosecution to move for cancellation if any condition was breached. Finding that the lower court had duly considered the material facts and provided a mechanism for revocation, the Court saw no basis to interfere. Consequently, the application for cancellation was disposed, leaving the bail order intact but permitting a future application for cancellation if conditions are violated.
Issues considered
- Whether the regular bail granted to Uttam Kumar was obtained on erroneous consideration and should be cancelled.
Subjects
- bail
- cancellation of bail
- criminal misappropriation
- forgery
- bank employee
- High Court
- procedural law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74275 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2020 Thana- AAYAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Onkar Nath Bharti Son Of Late Deependra Nath Sah Resident Of Village-
Kasim Bazar, P.S.- Raj Mahal, District- Sahebganj, At Present Posted As
Branch Manager, Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank, Ambujganj, P.O. And P.S.-
Ambujganj, District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Uttam Kumar Son of Birendra Kumar Rai @ Virendra Kumar Ray Resident
of village- Khanet, P.O.- Khanet, P.S.- Pawar, District- Bhojpur (Ara)
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mahesh Narayan Parbat, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Praveen Prabhakar, Adv.
For the State : Md. Fahimuddin, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. Mahesh Narayan Parbat, learned senior
counsel for the petitioner, who is the Branch Manager of
Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank and learned APP for the State.
2. The present application is for cancellation of
regular bail granted by the learned Additional District and
Sessions Judge-X, Bhojpur at Ara by stating that the court
concerned had granted bail to the opposite party no. 2 upon
wrong and erroneous consideration.
3. It has been submitted that the learned court
concerned has not properly appreciated the fact that the present
opposite party no. 2 was an employee of the Bank and he had
indulged in forgery as it was his I.D. which was used for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74275 of 2022(3) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
commission of the offence due to which misappropriation of an
amount to the tune of Rs. 11,29,987/- an odd was committed. It
has also been submitted that the case of the present opposite
party no. 2 was not similarly situated with the other co-accused
person who had been granted bail and hence, the impugned
order granting bail to the opposite party no. 2 suffers from
perversity and wrong appreciation of facts.
4. Upon perusal of order dated 30.09.2022 granting
regular bail to opposite party no.2, it is found that the learned
court concerned has passed an order supported by reasons and
the bail that has been granted to the petitioner has also been
passed on the condition of deposit of Rs. 4,15,380/- which was
the alleged amount which had been said to be transferred to the
account of the concerned Bank. The order makes it very clear
that the opposite party no. 2 would be released on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- only upon receipt of deposit of Rs.
4,15,380/- in the concerned Bank and he has also subjected the
petitioner to other conditions, being, cooperation in the
investigation, not tampering with the evidences not influencing
the witnesses and to regularly attend the court proceedings
whenever called upon to do so. In addition to the same, it has
also been emphasized that in case of violation of any of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74275 of 2022(3) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
conditions of the order granting bail, the said order would be
liable to be cancelled upon appropriate application by the
prosecution.
5. Taking into consideration the entire facts and
circumstances of the case which relates to criminal
misappropriation of money and also taking into consideration
the fact that the learned court concerned granting bail to the
opposite party no. 2 has taken into consideration all the relevant
facts and has rather also given liberty to approach for
cancellation of bail in case of violation of any of the conditions,
I do not see any reason to interfere with such order.
6. However, the petitioner would always be at liberty
to file an application for cancellation of bail in case of violation
of any of the conditions of the bail already granted to the
opposite party no. 2.
7. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of
with the aforesaid liberty.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…