Deo Kumar @ Deo Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66029 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-184 Year-2025 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Deo Kumar @ Deo Kumar Yadav S/O Kishori Yadav Resident of Ward No. 11, Maina Tand, P.S.- Maina Tand, District- Bettiah, West Champaran ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 316(5), 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per prosecution case, informant, the District Programme Officer, Education department, Lakhisarai, came to know through social media platform about one file named 'Himanshu'. Since, said file was demanded by the office of District Education Officer, informant asked the Junior Manager, Technical and Assistant Manager, Technical, posted in Samagra Siksha Abhiyan to provide the said file but no such file was provided to the informant. It is further stated that all the civil works of Education Department is executed by Junior Manager Technical/Deputy Manager Technical/ Assistant Manager Technical associated with Samagra Siksha Abhiyan and these
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66029 of 2025(2) dt.23-09-2025 2/3 officials are custodian of all the required documents and files. Informant suspects that these officials, namely, Banti Kumar Singh, Deo Kumar (petitioner) and Abhay Pal might have destroyed above files.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that this petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Allegation made in the FIR is vague because it does not disclose specific details, such as real custodian of file, date and location of the offence. Petitioner is not custodian of the file in question. Regrading missing of such file, no show cause notice has been given to the petitioner by the department. FIR has been lodged on 24.4.2025 but petitioner's service expired on 31.3.2025. File in question is related to Suryagarha block whereas petitioner had never been assigned work of that block. Petitioner claim clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for bail of this petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within eight weeks from today, let this petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66029 of 2025(2) dt.23-09-2025 3/3 like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai in Lakhisarai Police Station Case No. 184 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T