Avinash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1385 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1014 Year-2025 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Avinash Kumar, S/o Suresh Prsasad @ Suresh Prasad Jaiswal, R/O - Magadh Colony, Kurji Sadakat Ashram, P.S- Digha, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate For the Informant :

Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate Mr. Manu Tripathi, Advocate Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No.1014 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the informant has supplied articles to the petitioner worth Rs. 48, 50,996/- whereas the petitioner had paid only Rs. 13,70,083/-. As per the case of the prosecution, the total amount with interest is now to the tune of Rs.80,55, 437/-.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. From perusal of the F.I.R. itself it is clear that there is dispute between the parties regarding payment of the articles. The petitioner denies the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1385 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026 2/2 allegations and according to him, nothing is due with him. The F.I.R. itself goes to show that it is a civil dispute between the parties. However, this case has been filed to pressurize the petitioner to pay the dues which are not paid according to the informant. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.11.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the application for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that he is ready to mediate the case if the petitioner is directed to deposit some amount.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-I, Danapur, District-Patna in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 1014 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T