Lal Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79458 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-435 Year-2023 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== Lal Vijay Kumar S/O Ramvilash Yadav R/O Village- Binoba Nagar, P.S.- MMCH, District- Gayaji ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate : Ms.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate : Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 22.06.2025 in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 435 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 07.07.2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 409,420,467,468 and 471/34 of IPC.
3. This case has been instituted by Ravindra Ram Bhu-Arjan Officer, Gaya on 07.07.2023. He stated that in his written application that two persons namely Kishore Kumar and Sunita Devi gave an information that their land acquired in AKIC planning but no compensation paid by the government up till now a forged document prepared and all money have been
2/4 withdrawn by the same other persons in conspiracy and forged document produce before the bank and before the officer. He further stated that Kishore Kumar A/c No.72460100143303 and Sunita Devi A/c No. 72460100143362 of South Bihar Gramin Bank, DBGB Kujapi Gaya is attached with was signed by Land Acquisition Officer, Gaya by both persons have submitted the account Number of Bank of Baroda Branch Kothwara, Gaya. Further enquiry set-up and found money withdrawn by other person in other Bank.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner has withdrawn Rs. Four Lacs from the Bank in question in place of Lal Vijay Kumar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the CCTV Footage of the Bank and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. Even the prosecution has not verified the signature
3/4 of the petitioner and the police, after investigation, submitted the chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 22.06.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was found in the CCTV footage of the Bank and apart from the aforesaid, the sign of the petitioner was found on the withdrawal slip.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-1st, Gaya in connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 435 of 2023, with the following conditions:- (I) 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
4/4 (III) 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 criminal antecedent, 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) Nitesh/- U