Jitendra Kumar Srivastav @ Jitendra Kumar Shrivastava v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16445 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-674 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar Srivastav @ Jitendra Kumar Shrivastava, Son of Ramnath Prasad, Resident of Village - Dhatiwna, P.S. - Thawe, District - Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prasoon Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rana Randhir Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 674 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 316(5) and 3(5) of B.N.S.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner has embezzled Rs. 9,10,998/-. He was a salesman and it is alleged that he has supplied the articles of ITC and HUL to the shopkeepers and has not deposited the sum with the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16445 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026 2/3 committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the F.I.R. it will transpire that in first part of the F.I.R. it is alleged that the duplicate key of the warehouse was obtained and theft was committed but in later part, it is alleged that the petitioner along with others has supplied the articles in market and has not deposited the sum. It has further been submitted that even the prosecution is not sure as to what kind of allegations they have putting. It has also been submitted that the fact is that the petitioner is a salesman and he has given the articles to the shopkeepers but as the shopkeepers have not paid the amount, this discrepancy has arrived. It has also been submitted that there is no malafide on the part of the petitioner. He is languishing in judicial custody since 25.11.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the application for bail.

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 C.J.M.,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16445 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026 3/3 Gopalganj in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case No. 674 of 2025.

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