Allowed¶21

Karuna Gupta v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC8 Jul 2025A.B.A./1168/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi — A.B.A. No.1168 of 2025 (Karuna Gupta & Anr. v. State of Jharkhand) — anticipatory bail under Sections 482 & 484 BNSS 2023 in case under Sections 406/420/34 IPC (Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.429 of 2023) concerning alleged non-refund of Rs.40 Lakhs loan — allowed; bail on Rs.10,000/- bonds each with conditioned sureties; decided by Ananda Sen, J.; neutral citation 2025:JHHC:18545.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions: surrender before the learned court below within four weeks; release on bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each; one surety to be a close relative and the other a resident of Jharkhand with sufficient landed property, evidenced by affidavit filed before the Trial Court. ¶21

Karuna Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, apprehending arrest in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.429 of 2023 for offences under Sections 406/420/34 IPC arising out of an alleged unpaid loan of Rs.40 Lakhs, are entitled to anticipatory bail.

¶12

Court's answer

Having regard to the nature of the allegation (a loan allegedly taken and not repaid), the court was inclined to allow the anticipatory bail application.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Anticipatory bail granted: the petitioners are to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks of receipt of the copy of the order and, upon surrender or arrest, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, one bailer being a close relative and the other a resident of Jharkhand having sufficient landed property, supported by affidavit indicating their share therein, before learned J.M. 1st Class, Ranchi, in Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.429 of 2023.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Application under Sections 482 & 484, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Offences under Sections 406/420/34 IPC — Allegation that petitioners took a loan of Rs.40 Lakhs and did not refund it, amounting to cheating; defence that it is purely a money transaction — Considering the nature of the allegation (essentially a loan-recovery dispute), anticipatory bail allowed (Ananda Sen, J.) — Petitioners directed to surrender within four weeks and to be released on bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, one surety a close relative and the other a resident of Jharkhand holding sufficient landed property, supported by affidavit — Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.429 of 2023.

¶1

2025:JHHC:18545

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1168 of 2025

¶3

Karuna Gupta, aged 52 years, W/o Ashok Kumar Gupta. 2. Anshu Gupta, age 24 years, W/o Shubham Gupta. Both R/o SBI Officers Colony, Devi Mandap Road, P.O.- Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeonagar, Dist.-Ranchi.

¶4

… … Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand.

¶7

… … Opposite Party

¶8

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

¶9

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Padhyay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, APP For the Informant : Mr. Niraj Kumar, Advocate

¶10

04/ 08.07.2025

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 & 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, have been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for offences under Sections 406/420/34 of IPC.

¶13

3. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶14

4. It is alleged that the petitioners have taken Rs.40 Lakhs loan but has not refunded a single penny and thus they cheated the informant.

¶15

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the entire allegation is false and it is only a money transaction and due to alleged non-refund of the loan, this case has been registered.

¶16

6. Mr. Niraj Kumar, appearing on behalf of the informant submits that there was an agreement which suggest that the petitioners have taken the money but they have not refunded the entire amount.

¶17

7. From the arguments of the parties, I find that this is a case where petitioners alleged to have taken loan but are not refunding the same. Considering the nature of the allegation, I am inclined to allow this application.

¶18

8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands

¶19

¶20

2025:JHHC:18545

¶21

allowed . The petitioners, above named, are directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of their surrender or arrest, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1^st Class, Ranchi, in connection with Sukhdeonagar P.S. Case No.429 of 2023, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioners and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in their name or in the name of their ancestors in which they are having share and to that effect, they have to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating their share in the property.

¶22

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶23

Sandeep. Cp-3

¶24

Karuna Gupta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karuna Gupta v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Jagdish Hajra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chandan Kumar Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Md. Saieed Hasan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Koushik Das Allias Kaushik Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jithu Kisku Alias Jethu Kisku Vs the State of Jharkhand

Madin Shekh Alias Moddin Shekh Vs the State of Jharkhand