Anand Kumar @ Anand Priyadarshi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32538 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2022 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Anand Kumar @ Anand Priyadarshi S/O Vijay Prasad @ Ajay Kumar Prasad Resident Of Village- Malahchak More Ward No. 46, P.S. -Jehanabad, DistrictJehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Srikant Sharma S/O Sri Kapil Dev Singh R/O Village- Dachhos, PsIslampur, Distt- Nalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, Advocate :

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

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 302 of 2022, for allegedly having committed offence under Sections 379, 406, 420 and 120(B) of the IPC.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant to the effect that during period of COVID, he started facing difficulties in running his truck and in making payment of the EMI, therefore he wanted to sell his truck. When, the informant disclosed his desire before the petitioner, the

2/4 petitioner along with co-accused Pappu Kumar and others, named in the first information report, came to the house of the informant. Sale documents on non-judicial stamp was prepared on 01.10.2021 for total consideration money of Rs. 3,50,000/-. Out of the same, Rs. 2,86,500/- was paid by the said Pappu Kumar in cash and Rs. 53,500/- was paid in the bank account of the son of the informant, by Pappu Kumar. On the request made by co-accused Dharmendra Kumar, it was agreed that remaining Rs. 10,000/- will be paid within 1-2 days, however after almost 6-7 months, the said amount to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- has not been paid to the informant. It has further been alleged that the mobile number of co-accused Pappu Kumar is closed and when he went to meet the financer, no satisfactory reply was given. The legal notice was also sent, however no reply was given. He further alleged that there is no knowledge about the truck.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. He submits that as per the first information report itself, an amount to the tune of Rs.10,000/- was not paid and allegation has been levelled by the informant that without giving the amount to the tune of Rs. 10,000/-, the truck has been taken away. The petitioner has got no concern with the occurrence in

3/4 question, since the truck was purchased by the co-accused Pappu Kumar. Further, all the payments have been made by coaccused Pappu Kumar and it has come during course of investigation that co-accused Pappu Kumar lives in Ludhiana. The petitioner has got one criminal antecedent pending against him bearing Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 664 of 2021, in which he is on bail.

5. Per contra, the learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner introduced the co-accused Pappu Kumar with the informant and after deal was finalised, Rs.10,000/- was not paid to the informant.

6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going through the record, it appears that an agreement was executed in between Pappu Kumar and the informant for sale of truck for a consideration amount of Rs. 3,50,000/-, out of which only 10,000/- was not paid by the co-accused Pappu Kumar, who purchased the truck in question. The allegation against the petitioner is that he introduced Pappu Kumar and other coaccused persons to the informant and apart from the same, nothing has been alleged against the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above

4/4 named, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released 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 A.C.J.M., Hilsa, Nalanda in connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 302 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with further condition:

(1) The learned Court concerned shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court concerned shall take steps 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. (Ritesh Kumar, J) AjayMishra/- U T