Ram Mohan Kumar @ Mohan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68211 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2025 Thana- TARIYANI CHOWK District- Sheohar ====================================================== Ram Mohan Kumar @ Mohan Kumar S/o- Bijali Prasad R/v - Gaushpur, P.s. Tariyani, District - Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Kumari Sujata Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard Mrs. Kumari Sujata Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Tariyani P.S. Case No. 131/2025 for the offence registered under sections 316(2), 318(4) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that accused persons have forcibly taken away the money from the amount that was allotted under Bihar State Crop Assistant Scheme. In that background, the District Magistrate, Sheohar made direction for lodging of the FIR against whom the allegations cropped up, petitioner included. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the amounts have gone to the beneficiary's account, nothing in the account of the petitioner and some of them are ready to put
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68211 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 it on affidavit. Earlier, the Co-ordinate Bench had directed the State Counsel to file affidavit and the same has come through the District Co-operative Officer-cum-Assistant Registrar, Sheohar.
5. Learned APP, Mr. Bharat Bhushan has taken this Court to the S.P. Sheohar report vide Memo no. 860 dated 21.07.2025 (Annexure-C series) to show that at least one amongst number of aggrieved persons (Rekha Devi) alleged that the petitioner came to her house and took her fingerprint, as a result whereof, out of Rs. 5,000/- which came in her account, Rs. 2,400/- was deducted.
6. Allegation is there, the S.P., Sheohar has got it supervised and had confirmed the case to be true, the petitioner as alleged has looted the innocent people and from a meagre amount of Rs. 5,000/-, has siphoned off Rs. 2,400/0. He has criminal antecedent too, in that background, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.
7. Cr. Misc. No. 68211 of 2025 stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T