Praduman Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82524 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2025 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Ujjawal Kumar, Son of Jai Kishore Rai, R/o - Rahar Diara, P.S.- Sonpur, District - Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 82753 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2025 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Praduman Kumar, Son of Laxman Rai, Resident of Pahleja Sahpur Diara, P.S.- Sonpur, District - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 82524 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 82753 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 91 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 316(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

2/4

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the informant is the Regional Sales Manager, L & T Finance, Patna, a non-banking finance company registered by R.B.I. It is further alleged that co-accused Amrit Kumar in collusion with different persons on the basis of forged documents got disbursed loan of Rs. 2,68,00,139/- for the purchase of tractor to different persons. These petitioners are one of the loanees.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. Their documents have been used by accused Amrit Kumar for cheating them and that they have received neither single penny nor any tractor. They are simple man having no knowledge regarding the transaction. Petitioners are having no criminal antecedent and they are languishing in judicial custody since 24.08.2025.

5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted and filed certain documents to show that the amount was disbursed in the loan account of the petitioners. Even they have repaid certain installments and after some time, they stopped paying the installments of the loan. Their other documents show that they

3/4 have also received the tractor. Learned counsel for the informant has further submitted that though the petitioners have received the loan and the tractor as well but it seems that they have sold the tractor and they are not willing to pay the loan.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. From perusal of the record, it is clear that in these transactions, one Amrit Kumar is the kingpin on whose instance, these transactions have taken place. On being asked, the petitioners have told that they have nothing and they are not able to repay their loan. Admittedly, they are loanee and there is outstanding loan against them but as far as the the factum of cheating is concerned, I do not find that there is any role of these petitioners.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-II, Danapur, Patna in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No.91 of 2025.

9. However, the informant, L & T Company is at liberty

4/4 to sue them at proper forum for recovering the loan. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T