Bharat Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3082 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1924 Year-2023 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== Bharat Kumar S/o Ramesh Kumar @ Rosh Sinha R/o House no 109, Road No 08, Shastri Nagar, PO- Chandauti, PS- Rampur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aniket Kumar Thakur , Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar , APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State .

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 147, 406, 420, 504, 506 and 120B of the I.P.C .

3 . As per prosecution story, the informant entered into an agreement on 03.02.2021 for sale of two Hyva Trucks in favour of one Ram Prasad Madiya and paid Rs. 5,00,000/- in advance and agreed to pay rest Rs. 37,00,000/- on installments but after few installments, he stopped the payment. It is alleged that accused persons had signed as witnesses in the agreement.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that at the relevant time , petitioner was working as a financer in Mahindra Finance and his professional role was strictly limited to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3082 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026 2/3 facilitate vehicle loans for customers as per company policy . He had no authority , role or involvement in the sale , purchase , rent or possession of vehicles. As a matter of fact, informant purchased four Hyva Trucks (14-tyre), two through Mahindra Finance and other two through Tat Finance . Informant was known to the petitioner since 2019 and as such, ; petitioner only helped informant to purchase two Hyva Trucmks with the help of Mahindra Finance where he was posted. Subsequently, due to corona and ill health of the daughter of informant, he was unable to pay the EMI of the trucks and therefore, petitioner suggested informant to let his vehicles on rent and paid the EMI but not a single money was paid by the informant to the petitioner.

Informant approached petitioner to arrange buyers/renters for the said vehicles. Petitioner considering the good relation with informant himself and even asked relatives to provide financial help of Rs. 13 lakhs, 19 thousand, 9 hundred. It is further submitted that informant withing giving any information to petitioner made an agreement to sell the vehicles with other accused persons and when petitioner demanded his money as well as his relative's money, informant falsely implicated this petitioner in the present case , just to avoid the payment of EMI. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3082 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026 3/3 5 . Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail petition .

6. Considering the clean antecedent of this petitioner, materials available on record and other circumstances of the case , in the event of arrest or surrender within eight weeks from today, let the petitioner, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate , Nawada in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 1924 of 2023 , subject to the conditions laid down under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS), 2023 .

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T