Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Birendra Kumar @ Virendra SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was refused.

Summary

The petitioner, a ward member of Koriyawan Gram Panchayat, was charged under Sections 316(2) and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly withdrawing Rs. 1,43,000 from a scheme fund meant for the Chief Minister Rural Nal‑Jal Scheme. He contended that the previous ward member had handed over only Rs. 1,32,944.04 and that he had no involvement in any misappropriation, asserting his clean antecedents. The State argued that the withdrawals were made through cheques in the petitioner’s favour and that he received the cash, indicating a specific allegation of misappropriation of government funds. The court examined the nature of the accusation and the material evidence on record. Considering the seriousness of the allegations and the available evidence, the court refused the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate decision on the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail under Sections 316(2) and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • misappropriation of public funds
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • corruption
  • public servant
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83866 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-716 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Birendra Kumar @ Virendra Sharma S/O Dinanath Mistri R/O Village -
                 Naralpura, P.O- Chiraura, P.S- Janipur (Phulwari Shariff), Dist.- Patna

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Sanjeeb Kumar Sanju, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   17-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Phulwari Sharif

                   (Janipur) P. S. Case No. 716 of 2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 316(2), 316(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita.

                                3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that this petitioner,

                   being Ward Member of Ward No. 9 of Koriyawan Gram

                   Panchayat, illegally withdrew Rs. 1,43,000/- from the account

                   of Ward No. 9, which was allocated for implementation of Chief

                   Minister Rural Nal-Jal Scheme.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner

                   was elected Ward Member in the year 2021 and the ex-ward

                   member handed over only Rs. 1,32,944.04/- for implementation
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83866 of 2025(6) dt.17-03-2026
                                                          2/2




                        of the said scheme without providing any measurement book or

                        other relevant documents. As a matter of fact, petitioner made

                        complaint against the earlier ward member demanding the due

                        expenses used in repairing of pipes etc. Petitioner claims clean

                        antecedent.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed

                        the bail application and submitted that there is specific

                        allegation that this petitioner misappropriated government fund

                        and from perusal of the account, it is apparent that withdrawals

                        were made through cheques in favour of this petitioner and he

                        himself received the cash.

                                     6. Considering the nature of accusation and materials

                        available on record, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner

                        is refused.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.