Munna Sao v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39170 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2025 Thana- PAUTHU District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1.
Munna Sao Son of Shiv Narayan Saw @ Shiw Narayan Saw @ Shiv Narayan Sao, Resident of Village- Rediya, P.O.- Kapasiya, P.S.- Aurangabad Muffasil, District- Aurangabad (Bihar).
2.
Hira Sao @ Hira Kumar Son of Shiv Narayan Saw @ Shiw Narayan Saw @ Shiv Narayan Sao Resident of Village- Rediya, P.O.- Kapasiya, P.S.- Aurangabad Muffasil, District- Aurangabad (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Ajit Kumar Son of Jagdish Singh, Resident of Village- Jain bigha, P.O.- Kauna, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad (Bihar). ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Leelawati Kumari, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioners and Ld. APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Pauthu P.S. Case No. 75 of 2025 dated 10.06.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per allegation, the petitioners purchased iron rod for Rs.8,86,860/- from the informant promising to pay the sale consideration later on. However, despite demand, they did not pay the amount.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39170 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. She further submits that petitioners have purchased the iron rod for consideration amount. However, at the time of purchase of the iron rod, petitioners had paid Rs.2,50,000/- and thereafter, they had paid the rest amount of Rs.6,36, 860/- on 08.08.2025. They have also filed proof of the payment of the rest amount, which is annexed as Annexure-2, which shows that total amount has been received by the informant.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioners have not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner No.1 has one criminal antecedent and petitioner No.2 has no criminal antecedent.
7. However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioners for bail.
8. Considering the civil nature of the dispute and payment of the total consideration amount, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioners, above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt /
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39170 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/3 production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court Below, in connection with Pauthu P.S. Case No. 75 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482
(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and on the following conditions: (i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioners have any criminal antecedents other than the disclosed one, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents despite their knowledge of the same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.) ravishankar/- U T