Patna High Court
Bijendra JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, as the allegations primarily target another accused and the petitioner has a clean antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Bijendra Jha, a junior engineer, was implicated in an FIR dated 18‑08‑2022 alleging fraud involving Rs 57,27,553 related to work in the Madhepura Vidhan Sabha constituency for FY 2014‑15, with charges under IPC sections 420, 409, 467 and 468. Jha contended that the primary accused, Akshayabar Ram, was responsible, had already repaid the amount, and had previously obtained anticipatory bail. Jha sought anticipatory bail, arguing he has a clean antecedent and that the case chiefly targets Akshayabar Ram. The State opposed the bail. The court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail to Jha, subject to a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case where the primary allegation is against another accused.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the repayment by the principal accused justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 409, 420, 467, 468
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- fraud
- IPC sections 420 409 467 468
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Madhepura
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81513 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-787 Year-2022 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura
======================================================
Bijendra Jha S/o Late Mangla Dutta Jha R/o Pratap Nagar, in front of Gaytri
Mandir, Ward No 16/32, P.S.- Saharsa, Distt.- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nishant Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409,
467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that an amount of Rs.57,27,553/- is recoverable from
Akshayabar Ram with regard to the work done in Madhepura
Vidhan Sabha Chhetra for the financial year 2014-15 as the
measurement book showed the work to be completed but on
physical verification the work was found not completed.
Further, Akshayabar Ram, on several occasions, was reminded
to return the amount but the same was not returned.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81513 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
further submitted that FIR came to be instituted on 18.08.2022
when the allegation pertains to the period 2014-15. It is next
submitted that the thrust of the allegation is against Akshayabar
Ram and the petitioner, being the Junior Engineer, came to be
implicated. It is also submitted that Akshayabar Ram has
already deposited the entire amount. It is further submitted that
Akshayabar Ram had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 41600 of 2023 and the
same came to be allowed by an order dated 07.08.2023. It is
next submitted that relying on Annexure-4 to the anticipatory
bail application that petitioner under the RTI Act has sought
information with regard to the payment of the amount on which
it was replied that the amount has been paid.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81513 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case
is pending/successor court in connection with Madhepura P.S.
Case No. 787 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…