Bhola Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51449 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-419 Year-2024 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMuzaffarpur

====================================================== Bhola Prasad S/o Late Basudev Prasad R/o Village- Madhuvan, P.O.Kalwari, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶4

The State of Bihar.

¶5

Akhilesh Kumar, The Branch Manager Union Bank of India, Akharaghat Road Branch, P.S.- Town District- Muzaffarpur.

¶6

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶7

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Prakash Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP For the Informant : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Roy, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA

¶8

ORAL ORDER

¶9

3 15-11-2025

¶10

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶11

petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and

¶12

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Town

¶14

P.S. Case No. 419/2024, registered for the offence under

¶15

Sections 420, 467, 468, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and

¶17

is in custody since 11.04.2025.

¶18

The present FIR is founded upon the complaint

¶19

case no. 503 of 2024 which was lodged by Union Bank of India, Muzaffarpur branch, through which it is alleged that the petitioner who is the empanelled valuer of the bank wrongly

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51449 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/4

¶21

assessed the purity of the gold, which was produced by the co-accused Ram Kumar to obtain loan of Rs. 1,44,000/-. It is also alleged through complaint that aforesaid loan was used for personal use.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that admittedly this petitioner was empanelled with complainant’s bank for valuation of the gold. It is submitted that the allegation is of conspiracy with coaccused Ram Kumar, who was sanctioned loan by the bank. It is pointed out that nothing transpired during the course of investigation, which may suggest that this petitioner is beneficiary out of conspiracy as alleged. While concluding argument, it is submitted that investigation of this case is already completed, for which charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶23

Explaining criminal antecedents of the petitioner, it is submitted that petitioner found involved in 25 cases with the same informant more or less having similar allegation and out of same, the petitioner is on bail in 22 cases. It is

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51449 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 3/4

¶25

submitted that if merit of the case is otherwise convincing in favour of the petitioner merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the prayer of bail ordinarily should not be declined. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court available through Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in (2020) 11 SCC 648.

¶26

Learned APP duly assisted by learned counsel Mr. Shivendra Kumar Roy, appearing on behalf of the informant, while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the accused/petitioner alleged to work under conspiracy with main co-accused adopting modus operandi by approving the spurious gold fit to obtain loan which makes huge financial loss to bank.

¶27

Considering the aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as prima facie during investigation nothing surfaced to suggest that this petitioner received any benefit out of loan sanctioned by the bank, coupled with the fact that investigation of this case is already completed, where petitioner remains in custody since 11.04.2025

¶28

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51449 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 4/4

¶29

accordingly, petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 419/2024, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur/concerned Court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS.

¶30

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶31

veena/-

¶32

U T

Bhola Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhola Prasad 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubhankar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Satyapal Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Manu Kumar @ Mannu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Kumar Mandal @ Pramod Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Baidyanath Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Nitesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar