CR. MISC./58972/2026 of Avinash Kumar @ Abhinash Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar on 19 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

19-08-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 650 of 2019, for allegedly having committed offence under Sections 379 and 420 of the IPC.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant to the effect that he went to an ATM, however he could not withdraw the money and thereafter, he proceeded towards another ATM of IDBI Bank. 3-4 persons were already present there. The informant withdrawn money from the said ATM at about 06:15 p.m. and when the informant went near the

ATM machine, he felt restless and ATM card fell down form his hand. One person picked up the ATM card of the informant and handed over to him. The informant took the ATM card and kept it in his pocket. At night, he received message on his mobile phone, which he saw in the morning, then he came to know that amount has been withdrawn from his account. Thereafter, the informant went to verify the ATM card, upon which he found that the ATM card was of another person, namely, Tarkeshwar Prasad. On 25.08.2019, the informant went to the police station, but the informant was directed to get his ATM card blocked first. The informant took a statement from the Branch, then he came to know that Rs. 20,000/- has been transferred in two transactions from his account and a purchase of Rs. 46,500/- have been made from Amar Garments, Motihari and Rs. 4500/- has been withdrawn from an ATM near Durga Mandir. The person in whose account the money has been transferred, was identified as the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. He submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is not true. He submits that a character certificate was issued in the name of the petitioner on 26.05.2026, wherein his character has been shown to be good. He further submits that till date, no process under Section 82/83 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner and the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the said amount of Rs. 40,000/-. He next submits that the petitioner has got a clean antecedent.

5. Per contra, the learned APP for the State, while opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, would submit that the first information report was lodged in 2019. The amount in the account of the petitioner was transferred in 2019 and now in 2026, the petitioner has filed the present anticipatory bail petition and is ready to deposit the said amount.

6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going through the records, it appears that the first information report was lodged in 2019 and on the date of occurrence itself, it has been alleged that Rs.40,000/- was transferred in the account of the petitioner and the petitioner, being aware about the transfer of the said Rs. 40,000/- did not make any effort to return the same, by approaching the Bank and slept over the matter. Now after seven year of the lodging of the present first information report, the present anticipatory bail petition has been filed. The petitioner being aware about the transfer of Rs. 40,000/- in his bank account, did not make any effort to enquire that from where the said amount has been transferred in his bank account, which goes to show that the petitioner was aware about the said transaction and accordingly, he did not make any effort to return the amount to its owner. Considering the allegations, this Court is not inclined to granted the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

AjayMishra/- (Ritesh Kumar, J) U T