Rajiv Kumar @ Vicky Vs The State of Bihar

Rajiv Kumar @ Vicky S/O Makeshwar Das Resident of Chitranjan Road, Ward- 9, Behind P.B. Middle School Mohalla- Manjar Chak, P.S- Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai.

¶16

... ... Petitioner/s

¶17

Versus

¶18

The State of Bihar

¶19

Chola Mandalam, MS General Insurance Company (Ltd) Branch Office atKhata No 203, Ganesh Nagar Ground Floor, Thane Road, Barh, Near Saera Halls Bihar- 803213

¶20

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶21

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 8471 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP For the Insurance Co. : Mr. Durgesh Kr. Singh, Adv. (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21453 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Adv. Mr. Shivendu Shekhar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Anita Kumari, APP For the Insurance Co. : Mr. Durgesh Kr. Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

4 18-08-2025

¶24

CR. MISC. No. 8471 of 2025

¶25

Heard the parties.

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8471 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 2/6

¶27

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

¶28

Barh P.S. Case No. 121 of 2024 registered for the

¶29

offence under Sections 420 467, 120B of the I.P.C.

¶30

The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 28.10.2024.

¶31

The allegation against the petitioner is to cheat insurance company M/s Chola Mandalams, General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai for which accused petitioner admittedly work as an agent. It is alleged that creating false insurance of vehicle petitioner caused loss of Rs. 1,66,38,781.

¶32

Mr. YC Verma, learned senior counsel

¶33

appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it is an admitted position that amount of policy done by petitioner was received by the company. It is also submitted by Mr. Verma that not even a single policy was honored due to present litigation, therefore the financial loss as suffered by the company appears none convincing

¶34

and questionable. While concluding the argument, it is

¶35

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8471 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 3/6

¶36

submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and moreover, investigation of this case is completed, for which charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶37

Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Durgesh

¶38

Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the insurance company/ O.P. No. 2 which was impleaded by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2025 while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the petitioner being an agent created a policy of more than 556 within 24 hours, which is a matter of concern, moreover, he insured four wheeler vehicle showing them as two wheeler .

¶39

In view of aforesaid factual and legal

¶40

submission and by taking note of fact as admittedly petitioner was agent and amount collected prima-facie deposited with O.P. No. 2/ company, coupled with fact that investigation of this case already completed where petitioner remains in custody since 28.10.2024, accordingly petitioner above named, is directed to be

¶41

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8471 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 4/6

¶42

released on bail in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 121 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM 1^st , Barh, Patna /concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C/ Section 480(3) of BNSS.

¶43

CR. MISC. No. 21453 of 2025

¶44

Heard the parties.

¶45

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

¶46

Barh P.S. Case No. 121 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120B of the I.P.C.

¶47

The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 28.10.2024.

¶48

The allegation against the petitioner is to

¶49

cheat insurance company M/s Chola Mandalams, General Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai for which accused petitioner admittedly work as an agent. It is alleged that creating false insurance of vehicle petitioner caused loss

¶50

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8471 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 5/6

¶51

of Rs. 1,66,38,781.

¶52

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior counsel

¶53

appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it is an admitted position that petitioner at no point of time was an employ of the insurance company and he not even carried on any business on behalf of insurance company. It is also submitted by Mr. Agrawal that allegation against petitioner is general and omnibus and he was not put on TIP. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and moreover, investigation of this case is completed, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶54

Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Durgesh Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the insurance company/ O.P. No. 2 which was impleaded by this Court vide order

¶55

dated 06.03.2025 while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the petitioner being an accomplice was aware about the transactions.

¶56

In view of aforesaid factual and legal

¶57

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8471 of 2025(4) dt.18-08-2025 6/6

¶58

submission and by taking note of fact as whatever amount was collected by this petitioner was received by

¶59

the company, coupled with fact that investigation of this case already completed where petitioner remains in custody since 28.10.2024, accordingly petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 121 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM 1^st , Barh, Patna /concerned court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C/ Section 480(3) of BNSS.

¶60

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶61

Sudha/-

¶62

U T

Rajiv Kumar @ Vicky v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Kumar @ Vicky v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shambhu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nago Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Buddhu Sah @ Budadhu Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Verma @ Sonu Vs The State of Bihar

Govinda Kumar @ Gobinda Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Abdul Kadir Vs The State of Bihar