The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges of cheating and cheque dishonour. The court directed surrender within four weeks and fixation of bail bonds subject to cooperation conditions.
Grant of anticipatory bail, direction to surrender within four weeks, fixation of bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.
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 JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3121 of 2022
------ Nitesh Raj .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand .... .... 2. Sujit Prasad ....Opposite Parties ------
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-----For the Petitioner : Ms. Rukmini Kumari, Adv. Ms. Neelam Kumari, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Sumit Prakash, Adv. ------
Order No.14 Dated- 23.01.2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 267 of 2021 instituted under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of N.I. Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
As per FIR, allegation is that the petitioner has taken friendly loan of Rs.20 lakhs from the informant for the treatment of his mother from January, 2015 to April, 2018. It is further alleged that when the informant demanded to return back his loan amount, the petitioner ultimately issued two cheques of Rs.10 lakhs each in favour of the informant which was dishonored due to insufficient fund in the account of petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. As per contents of FIR, no offence under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC are made out in this case rather it is a case of friendly loan. No concrete materials have been collected against petitioner during investigation of this case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State assisted with learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he has cheated the informant by taking friendly loan amount of Rs.20 lakhs and in this regard, an agreement was prepared on 28th September, 2018. Petitioner has also issued two cheques of Rs.10
lakhs each but the same has been dishonored due to insufficient funds in his account, which shows the complicity of petitioner in the alleged offence. Hence, petitioner may not be extended privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioner coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Ramgarh in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 267 of 2021 with the condition that he will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Pappu/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC and Section 138 NI Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Nitesh Raj
The State of Jharkhand
Sujit Prasad
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
