Patna High Court – Orders
Smt. Niharika Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 12 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16556 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2017 Thana- ASHTHAWAN District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Smt. Niharika Kumari Wife of Kamala Kant Sinha Resident of village-
Andi, Ps- Asthawan, Dist- Nalanda
2. Balmiki Singh @ Balmiki Prasad Son of Late Jago Singh village- Laranpur,
Ps- Islampur,Dist- Nalanda
3. Kaushalandra Prasad Singh son of Late Dwarika Ram Resident of village-
Andi, Ps- Asthawan, Dist- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Siya Ram Shahi
Mr. Rabindra Prasad Singh
For the Informant Mr. Dineshwar Mishra
Ms. Ruchi Arya
For the State : Md. Aslam Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
8 12-08-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel
for the informant.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 409,
403, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation in the first information report is that
the then Block Agriculture Officer in collusion with the Block
Development Officer, Panchayat Sevak, Revenue Clerk and
Mukhiya of the Panchayat distributed the compensation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16556 of 2025(8) dt.12-08-2025
2/4
amongst the farmers, who were not the actual beneficiaries and
as a result several persons, who were entitled for compensation,
were not paid the amount of compensation, including the
informant. The matter arises out of a complaint case filed by the
complainant/informant making allegations in payment of
compensation of public money.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are the then Mukhiya, the Panchayat Secretary and a
farmer. It has been submitted that the entire case rests mainly on
suspicion and no substantive or concrete evidence has transpired
against the petitioners in the entire exhaustive investigation till
date. Learned counsel for the petitioners invites the attention of
this Court to paragraph-24 of the case diary and a perusal of the
same would show that there are different stages in which the list
of beneficiaries is prepared and there is a role of the entire
recommending committee in the entire process. It also transpires
from paragraph-24 of the case diary that prima facie, the case
has not been found true against the present petitioners and other
23 accused persons. Subsequent investigation, which is in the
form of a supervision of the entire case, recorded in paragraph-
213 of the case diary also shows that the entire case is based on
documentary evidence which is not properly arranged and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16556 of 2025(8) dt.12-08-2025
3/4
collected and the case has been found true against only three
accused persons namely, Santosh, Shiv Balak and Ram Chandra
Prasad and the investigation remained pending against the rest
23 accused persons including the present petitioners and till
date, some more details are being sought for to ascertain as to
how much land has been actually misappropriated. Further, the
petitioners are all senior citizens of more than 60 years of age
having no criminal antecedent and are also not likely to abscond
or tamper with the evidence.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail
on the ground that grave irregularities have been committed in
the process of distribution of compensation amount to the
beneficiaries and the petitioners holding position of
responsibility are responsible for the same. It has also been
pointed out that there is a huge delay in approaching the Court
for grant of anticipatory bail. In response to the same, it has
been submitted that since the investigation had disclosed no
prima facie case against the petitioners and till date the facts
remain hazy, the petitioners were not apprehending their arrest
and hence, they did not approach the courts earlier.
6. Considering the rival contentions, this Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16556 of 2025(8) dt.12-08-2025
4/4
finds that no substantial or concrete evidence has been collected
during the course of investigation and the entire case is based
upon documents and considering the fact that the petitioners are
all senior citizens with no criminal antecedents, let the above
named petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender before
the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from
today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with Asthawan
P.S. Case No. 42 of 2017, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.,
subject to the further condition that the petitioners would
cooperate with the investigation and would make themselves
available before the Investigating Agency as and when required
and in case there is any non-cooperation on their part in the
process of investigation or subsequent trial, the prosecution
would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of the
bail bonds.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T