Patna High Court
Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to strict conditions, despite the serious nature of the allegations.
Summary
Amit Kumar was arrested in connection with an FIR alleging misappropriation of Rs 6,12,532.57 of government funds under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The petitioner, claiming a clean antecedent, had already deposited the entire amount with the Department of Post and sought anticipatory bail. The Union of India opposed the bail, arguing that the petitioner had initially taken the money. The High Court, considering the deposit and the petitioner’s clean record, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, including a bail bond and sureties, cooperation with the trial, and non‑tampering with evidence. The order directed the lower court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent and stipulated cancellation of bail for non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person accused under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether the deposit of the alleged misappropriated amount negates the necessity for custodial detention.
- Whether a clean criminal antecedent suffices for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC.
- The applicability of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 in granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 316(5), 318(4), 482(2), 61(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- misappropriation of government funds
- clean antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.
- bail conditions
- deposit of proceeds
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87278 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2025 Thana- RANIGANJ District- Araria
======================================================
Amit Kumar Son of Late Brahmadev Mandal R/o Village - Chhatiouna, Ward
No. 10, P.S. - Raniganj, Dist. - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Union of India through Department of Post, India. India
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP
For the Union of India : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Mohammed Arif, learned APP for the State and Mr.
Manoj Kumar Singh, learned CGC for the Union of India.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No. 89 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
05.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
316(5), 318(4), 61(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has
grabbed the Government money to the tune of Rs. 6,12,532.57
(Rupees Six Lakhs Twelve Thousand Five Hundred and Thirty
Two and Fifty Seven Paise).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87278 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
in the present case. As per allegation in the F.I.R. the petitioner
has grabbed the total amount to the tune of Rs. 6,12,532.57
(Rupees Six Lakhs Twelve Thousand Five Hundred and Thirty
Two and Fifty Seven Paise) and he has deposited Rs. 1,80,000/-
(One Lakh and Eighty Thousand) on 15.01.2024 and the F.I.R.
was instituted for grabbing an amount of Rs. 4,32,533/- ( Rupees
Four Lakhs Thirty Two Thousand and Five Hundred Thirty Three).
Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he has
deposited the same on 04.08.2025 in the Office of ASP, Araria,
Sub-Divisional Araria and the authority has received the same.
5. Learned counsel for the Union of India, on the other
hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of
petitioner and submits that although the petitioner has deposited
the amount in question but initially he has grabbed the amount in
question.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent
and he has deposited the entire grabbed amount in the Department,
let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days
from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87278 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
A.C.J.M. 1st, Araria in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No. 89
of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of
BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on
his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his
bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
Ibrar//- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
U T
Checking your session…