Angad Singh Saroya v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34198 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2024 Thana- BARARI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1 .
Angad Singh Saroya S/o Jaspreet Singh Director of Masters Development Management (India) Private Limited, having its Office address at Unit- 207 and 208, Sagar Tech Plaza, B Wing, Sakinaka Junction, Police StationSakinaka, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri, East Mumbai- 400072. 2.
Daras Kaur Saroya W/o Jaspreet Singh Director of Masters Development Management (India) Private Limited, having its Office address at Unit- 207 and 208, Sagar Tech Plaza, B Wing, Sakinaka Junction, Police StationSakinaka, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri, East Mumbai- 400072. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, senior Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State .
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 316(2), 316(5), 319(2), 318 (4), 338, 336 (3), 340 (2), 308 (3) and 161
(2) of BNS.
3 . According to the First Information Report, the
2/4 informant alleges that on November 11, 2021, Master Development Management Pvt. Ltd. and its officers entered into an agreement for construction work valued at Rs. 36 crores, stipulated for completion within 16 months. The prosecution case asserts that while the accused executed only approximately 30% of the contracted work, they engaged in a fraudulent scheme involving the preparation of bogus invoices and false credit notes to dishonestly withdraw Rs. 93,79,000/-. Given that the accused were purportedly entitled to only Rs. 19,47,193/- based on the actual progress of the work, they allegedly misappropriated an excess sum of Rs. 74,31,807/-, thereby causing a substantial wrongful loss to both the State exchequer and the concerned institution through criminal breach of trust and falsification of accounts.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that petitions are not named in the F.I.R. The present case is entirely false, frivolous and vexatious, lodged with mala fide intention of coercing the Company of these petitioners for undue gain. There is an absolute dearth of documentary evidence on record to substantiate the allegation that the company of petitioners received any excess payments through the issuance of bogus invoices. Furthermore, the petitioners maintain that they have no
3/4 nexus with the alleged occurrence. Moreover, dispute involved in this case is purely civil in nature. Similarly situated coaccused persons have already been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Cri) No. 3786 of 2026, vide order dated 06.04.2026 . Petitioners claim clean antecedent.
5 . Learned counsel for the State oppose the bail petition .
6 Considering the fact that similarly situated accused persons have already been granted bail by the Apex Court, materials available on record and other circumstances of the case , in the event of arrest or surrender within eight weeks from today, let the petitioners, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Bhagalpur in connection with Barari P.S. Case No. 90 of 2024 , subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 ( 2 ) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS) , 2023 with the following conditions:- "1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court below and shall remain physically present, as directed by the court below, and on his absence on two consecutive dated without
4/4 sufficient reason, his bail-bond shall be cancelled by the court below.
2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at libery to move for cancellation of bail."
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T