Mitu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52734 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Mitu Kumar S/o- Shri Jitendra Narayan Singh @ Shri Jeet Narayan Singh R/o- Jalpura, P.S. Paliganj, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Dinesh Singh S/o- Rajnandan Singh Village- Chakiya, P.S. Paliganj, DistrictPatna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Patanjali Rishi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP For the Complainant :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Yadav, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the complainant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 167(C) of 2018 instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that- the petitioner took 9,04,200/- from the informant for supply of bricks but ₹

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52734 of 2025(4) dt.11-11-2025 2/3 supplied only part of it and failed to return the remaining amount despite repeated demands, and later abused and threatened the informant when asked for payment.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is false and baseless and has been levelled to harass the petitioner. He further submitted that except for bare statement, the opposite party no. 2 did not bring on record any material to show any transaction of money as alleged in the complaint. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 04.06.2025 and has three criminal antecedents.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52734 of 2025(4) dt.11-11-2025 3/3 below/concerned Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 167(C) of 2018.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T