Jitendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91598 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2022 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Jitendra Singh S/o Shatrudhan Singh R/o Village - Bhadawar, P.S - Bagen, District - Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Bihar 2.
Gopal Sah @ Gopal Prasad S/o Late Vishwanath Prasad Resident of - Ward no. 5, Nokha, P.O - Nokha, P.S - Nokha, District - Rohtas ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajani Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay For the informant :
Mr. Santosh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned APP for the State, and the learned counsel for the complainant.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 259 of 2022 in which cognizance has been taken under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and others are accused of cheating and criminal breach of trust in connection with money transactions pursuant to an agreement for sale and purchase of land.
4. From the agreement it appears that the petitioner along with Aditya Kumar and others has taken an amount from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91598 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2026 2/2 the complainant but it has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is Aditya Kumar in whose account the entire amount has been transferred; therefore, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.
5. When the petitioner, Aditya Kumar and Ravi Ji have together cheated the complainant, it does not matter whether the amount was transferred to the account of one person or all three.
6. Considering the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.
(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U