Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed to quash order cancelling bail and issuing non-bailable warrant in a cheque dishonour case. The Court held that negligence and latches by the petitioner necessitated the warrant, finding no merit in the plea. The petition was dismissed.
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
Cr.M.P No.3413 of 2024
Pankaj Kumar Yadav, aged about 47 years, Son of Chaturi Yadav @ Chaturi Mahto, resident at village Belahi, P.O. Basaria, P.S.- Chouparan, District-Hazaribagh (Jharkhand) … Petitioner
Versus
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nawal Kishor Pandey, Adv. For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl.P.P.
Order No.04/Dated- 09.01.2025
Spl.P.P. for State are present.
dated 25.03.2019 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Latehar in complaint case No. 07/2018 in which the learned trial
court has cancelled the bail bond of the petitioner and order to issue N.B.W and further prays to quash the order dated 11.04.2019 and 16.05.2019 passed by learned trial court to issue process of Section 82 of Cr.P.C.
case was filed for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act by the opposite party no.2 as the petitioner had received an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- for selling truck and rest amount had to be paid at
Page 1 of 3
the time of transfer of ownership but due to some documentation, the ownership of the vehicle could not be transferred. Thereafter, as per agreement dated 22.07.2017 a cheque of Rs. 2,50,000/- was
given by the petitioner which was dishonored due to insufficiency of funds and upon the notice, neither the amount was refunded nor the notice was replied. The petitioner has surrendered upon summons and the learned trail court has released the petitioner on bail by furnishing the bail bond of Rs.3,000/-. It is further argued that the petitioner has physically appeared before learned trial court on 04.10.2018 and was represented through his advocate at next date of appearing. On 25.03.2019, the representation of petitioner through advocate was
not accepted and the learned trial court has cancelled the bail bond and issued NBW against him. On the next dates of hearing, learned trial court has issued process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C.
It is next submitted that the learned trial court has failed to comply the terms and conditions before issuance of the nonbailable warrant against the petitioner.
contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that
the learned trial court has very wisely and aptly considered the
Page 2 of 3
matter and arrived at right conclusion. There is no interference
required by this Hon’ble Court and this case may be dismissed.
this Cr.M.P. being devoid of merits is dismissed.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Amar/-
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's cancellation of bail and issuance of non-bailable warrant and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. in a cheque dishonour case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pankaj Kumar Yadav
The State of Jharkhand
Krishna Gopal Sahu
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
