Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raghav Prasad, Advocate Mrs. Urmila Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh,APP For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate Ms. Shrishti Singh, Advocate ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶12

9 17-04-2026

¶13

Heard Mr. Raghav Prasad, learned counsel for the

¶14

petitioner duly assisted by Mrs. Urmila Kumari, Mr. Pranav Kumar duly assisted by Ms. Shrishti Singh for the informant beside Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP.

¶15

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 605 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 120(B), 419 of the Indian Penal Code, lodged on 06.11.2022 by the informant, Manorama Devi.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that she had an agreement with the petitioner for purchase of

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59352 of 2025(9) dt.17-04-2026 2/3

¶18

land for consideration amount of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- and advance amount of total Rs. 51,00,000/- was/were paid to the petitioner. However, later, it came to the notice of the informant that the land belongs to the Housing Board and as such, she demanded money which was not provided which led to the F.I.R.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such transaction took place and on the basis of wrong allegation, FIR has been lodged. The petitioner never received a single penny from the informant.

¶20

The informant has appeared and Mr. Pranav Kumar has taken this Court to the account of the AXIS bank to show that this petitioner alongwith Dhiraj Singh were operating the account and on 08.09.2022, the informant has transferred Rs.21,00,000/- in the said account.

¶21

The submission is that not only the petitioner played fraud upon the informant, despite the FIR lodged vide Rampur P.S. Case No. 605 of 2022 on 06.11.2022, he want ahead and after six months, executed sale-deed for the same land for a consideration amount of Rs.53,33,000/-. The said document is part of the supplementary affidavit filed by the informant (wrongly stated as petitioner).

¶22

Having heard the parties, this Court has taken note

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59352 of 2025(9) dt.17-04-2026 3/3

¶24

of the fact that despite the provisional bail granted to the petitioner on 03.07.2024, he chose to remain outside the purview of judicial net and surrendered only on 19.05.2025(after ten months).

¶25

This Court has also taken note of the modus operandi of the petitioner in getting money from one person and then executing the sale-deed to another person. Rs.21,00,000/admittedly went in his joint account with Dhiraj Singh, FIR lodged in the year 2022, whereafter in the year 2023, he transferred the same land to someone for a consideration amount of Rs.53,33,000/-. Certainty, he has played fraud in the matter.

¶26

The bail application stands rejected. As the petitioner is in custody earlier from 13.10.2023 to 03.07.2024 and thereafter after avoiding arrest, once the provisional bail application was cancelled, from 19.05.2025 till date, the Trial Court is requested to conclude the trial in next six months.

¶27

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶28

Ravi/-

¶29

U T

Vijay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Kumar 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

Raj Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Awadhesh Kumar Yadav @ Avdesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Amim Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Aftab Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Anand Shankar Vs The State of Bihar

Viswnath Sahni @ vishwanath Sahni Vs The State of Bihar