Navin Kumar @ Ramashray Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54101 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2017 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Navin Kumar @ Ramashray Yadav S/o- Late Sudama Yadav VillageBahadurpur W.No-13, Ps- Areraj Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Ashok Kumar Giri S/o- Late Ramlagan Giri Village- Nand Bihar Colony PsMithunpur Dist- Muzaffarpur, A/P- Motihari Branch LIC Chhatauni Chowk Motihari Ps- Chhatauni Dist- East Champaran 3.

The LIC of India through its Branch Manager Motihari Branch (East Champaran) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP For the LIC :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rajnikant Singh, Advocate Mr. Sameer Sawarn, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 05-12-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the LIC.

2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the petitioner in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case no.226 of 2017 registered under sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the FIR, an internal audit by LIC, Motihari revealed that certain living persons had fraudulently claimed death benefits by using forged documents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's wife signed a declaration of his death in good faith.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54101 of 2025(4) dt.05-12-2025 2/2 After 3,18,000 was mistakenly credited to the petitioner's ₹ account, he immediately submitted a written application to return the amount. Although LIC did not respond, the petitioner has already refunded the entire sum. He further submits that petitioner is aged about 68 years old having clean antecedent and has been in custody since 02.06.2025.

5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State. However, learned counsel for the LIC admits that the amount has been refunded.

6. Taking into consideration the above mentioned facts of the case and considering the fact petitioner is an old man and is in custody since 02.06.2025 coupled with the fact that the amount in question has already been returned to the LIC, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case no.226 of 2017 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned where the case is pending/successor Court.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T