Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39429/2026bail granted

Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-23Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39429 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2026 Thana- DARIGAON District- Rohtas ====================================================== Vijay Kumar S/O Harihar Singh Resident of Village- Tekari, Police StationChenari, Distt-Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kamla Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-06-2026 Heard Mr. Kamla Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 30.03.2026, in connection with Darigaon P.S. Case No. 57 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 29.03.2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) of the B.N.S.

3. The F.I.R. of the occurrence of committing fraud is against unknown.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

2/4 Initially, the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the self confessional statement of the petitioner (Annexure-2). Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner have a shop namely, Vijay Enterprises and he deposite and withdraw money using his Aadhar Card. He further submits that on 29.03.2026 one person namely Upendra Yadav @ Katappa deposited Rs. 60,600/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand and Six Hundred) into his scanner of mobile which belongs to the petitioner and for which he has repaid to him of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand) and Rs.

600/- (Six Hundred) was also paid to the petitioner as a commission and for the aforesaid transaction, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and till date no test identification parade was conducted by the prosecution. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 30.03.2026.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

3/4 petitioner and submits that the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present occurrence and apart from aforesaid, the details mobile phone of the petitioner suggests that he has received the amount from the accused persons.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas (Sasaram) in connection with Darigaon P.S. Case No. 57 of 2026, subject to 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 and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

4/4 criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step 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.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T