Patna High Court
PARWATI DEVIversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the anticipatory bail application could not be decided at this stage and directed the petitioners to obtain a District Magistrate’s certification of work completion before the lower court can grant bail.
Summary
The petitioners, Parwati Devi and Bhushankumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS 380/2022) alleging offences under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged non‑completion and misappropriation of government scheme work. They claimed innocence, asserted that the work had now been completed, and requested bail, while the State opposed the application. The High Court noted that a report from the District Magistrate, ordered on 26‑02‑2024, had not been received, leaving the factual issue of work completion unresolved. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioners to approach the lower court again after obtaining the District Magistrate’s certification of work completion; the lower court would then decide on anticipatory bail, or the petitioners would have to surrender and seek regular bail if the work remained incomplete. The application for anticipatory bail was therefore disposed without any order granting bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners pending verification of the completion of the government work.
- Whether the absence of the District Magistrate’s report precludes the High Court from deciding the anticipatory bail application.
- If the work is not completed, whether the petitioners must surrender and apply for regular bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 409, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 406
- Section 409
- Section 420
- misappropriation of government funds
- district magistrate report
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78754 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-380 Year-2022 Thana- CHHAURADANO District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. PARWATI DEVI W/O- BABULAL RAI R/O- VILLAGE- KORAIYA WAD
NO.- 4, P.S.- MAHUAWA, DIST.- EAST CHAMPARANT. MOTIHARI
2. BHUSHANKUMAR YADAV S/O- LALBABU RAI R/O- VILLAGE-
KORAIYA WAD NO.- 4, P.S.- MAHUAWA, DIST.- EAST
CHAMPARANT. MOTIHARI
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR, PATNA
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta
Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in
connection with Chhauradano P.S. Case No. 380 of 2022
registered for the offence under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioners are
alleged to have not completed the work assigned to them by
Government and it is also alleged that the petitioners have
misappropriated the government money for the said scheme.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78754 of 2023(4) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and they have
falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the
work has been completed now and therefore the petitioners may
be granted anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the
application of the petitioners.
6. From perusal of the records of this case, it
appears that vide order 26.02.2024, the District Magistrate, East
Champaran was asked to submit a report regarding the present
issue but till date, no report has been received.
7. In view of the above, this application is disposed
of with a direction to the petitioners to move the Court below
afresh and thereafter, the Court below will verify about the
conclusion of work from the District Magistrate concerned. If
the District Magistrate certifies that the work has been
completed then the Court below will pass an appropriate order
with regard to the anticipatory bail of the petitioner without
being prejudiced by the fact that this Court has not passed any
order with regard to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It
is also made clear that if the Court below finds that the work has
not been completed then the petitioners will surrender and pray
for regular bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78754 of 2023(4) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
8. With the aforesaid direction, this application is
disposed of.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…