Petitioner sought regular bail in a case under BNS Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) for alleged embezzlement of Rs. 26,74,547 from his employer's firm, deposited in cash into his and his wife's accounts. Considering the gravity of the offence and the amount involved, the court declined bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43899 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- SIMRI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Alok Kumar Son of Navin Kumar Tiwari @ Navin Kumar Resident of Village- Farpur, P.S.- Simri, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aryan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER
3 13-07-2026
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and the same is taken on record.
2 . The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Simri Bazar P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3 . As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have embezzled Rs. 26,74,547/- from the firm of the informant and the informant’s sister-in-law and is said to have deposited the said amount in cash into his own bank account as well as his wife’s bank account.
4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43899 of 2026(3) dt.13-07-2026 2/3
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. Petitioner is in custody since 18.04.2026 and has clean antecedent. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not cheated the informant though he is alleged to have cheated Rs. 26,74,547/-.
5 . Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave in nature. It is contended that there exists prima facie material against the petitioner indicating his involvement in the commission of the offence.
6 . Having considered the submissions of the parties, the material available on record, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the fact that such a huge amount was allegedly cheated by an employee of the informant, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
7 . Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands dismissed.
8 . It is made clear that any observation made herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43899 of 2026(3) dt.13-07-2026 3/3
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to an employee accused of embezzling about Rs. 26.74 lakh from the informant's firm.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Alok Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sandeep Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
