Satyendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79984 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-568 Year-2022 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Satyendra Kumar S/o- Eknath Singh R/v- Krishna Sadan, Husaina Niwas Yadav Nagar Gali NO-1, Bhagwanpur Ps- Muzaffarpur Sadar DistMuzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Divya Bharti, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Mani Kumar Manish, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 406, 420 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner has taken the truck of the informant on rent. When the informant demanded the rental amount, he disclosed that the vehicle has been stolen.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Leaned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79984 of 2025(8) dt.12-05-2026 2/3 perusal of the F.I.R. itself it is clear that the vehicle was given on rent to two persons Satyendra Kumar and Nagendra Kumar Sinha. It has further been submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that the vehicle was given to this petitioner. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has informed the informant that the vehicle has been stolen. It has further been submitted that the vehicle was not recovered during investigation. The petitioner has been framed in this case only on the basis of his antecedents. It has further been submitted that this is a case under Section 379, 406, 420 and 411 of I.P.C. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 16.10.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the application for bail and has submitted that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of 75 cases.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Sitamarhi in connection with Riga P.S. Case No.568 of 2022 with the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79984 of 2025(8) dt.12-05-2026 3/3 following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall cooperate in trial and shall remain physically present on each and every date in the learned trial Court.

(ii) One of the bailors shall be close relative of the petitioner.

(iii) He shall also mark his weekly attendance at Sitamarhi P.S.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T