Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28368 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2022 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar S/o- Satish Yadav Resident of VillagePathalgada (Pathalghatta) P.S.- Buniyadganj, District Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Niraj Kumar S/o- Rajendra Paswan Village- Narawat Ps- Atri Dist- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Fahimuddin, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25.02.2021, informant had sold 552 quintal paddy at the rate of Rs 1,650/- per quintal to the accused persons named in the F.I.R., including this petitioner, and at the time of delivery, accused persons assured payment by 05.09.2021, however, they did not make the payments. Thereafter, informant brought the matter before the Sarpanch of Shadipur Panchayat where the accused persons admitted the fact of purchasing paddy from the informant and asked for 15 days' time for payment of the dues but till date, no money has been paid to the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28368 of 2025(2) dt.15-07-2025 2/2 behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner used to work as daily wager at the PACS office in loading and unloading of paddy and he was not involved in the management, functioning or day-to-day business of the PACS. It is further submitted that there is no chit of paper on record to substantiate the allegations levelled against the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the backdrop of the case and nature of accusation, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, 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 learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-XIII, Gaya in connection with Atri P. S. Case No. 166 of 2022, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T