Single Judge High Court enlarged the petitioner on regular bail in a criminal appeal. The case involves allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and cheque dishonour arising from a money dispute.
The petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32844 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-515 Year-2019 Thana- MANER District- Patna
======================================================
Ram Babu Rai S/o Late Ram Jasi Rai Resident of Village-Hira Tola, Sherpur, P.S.-Maner,District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Kashyap, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through video conferencing.
The instant application for regular bail has been filed by the petitioner in connection with Maner P.S. Case No.515 of 2019 registered under sections 420, 406, 323, 327, 352, 506, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Initially, a complaint was filed by the complainant which on direction of the learned Court below, an F.I.R. was registered.
As per allegation in the FIR, in brief the substance of the allegation is that the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs.10
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32844 of 2020(2) dt.08-12-2020 2/3
lacs with promise to return the same and in liu thereof he promised to execute a sale deed. It is stated by the informant that he paid a sum of Rs. 6 lacs through RTGS and Rs.1.44 lacs in cash. However, neither the amount was returned nor the sale deed, as promised, was executed. Hence the F.I.R.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that from perusal of the contents of the F.I.R. itself it would transpire that the same is out and out a money dispute which relates to differences between the parties with respect to the accounts. It is further submitted that it is for oblique reason that the instant F.I.R. has been lodged and with respect to the accounting as explained in different paragraphs of the petition, it is submitted that in fact the petitioner has paid an excess sum of Rs. 63,120/. The petitioner is in custody since 18.11.2019.
The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations as levelled in the F.I.R. together with the petitioner being in custody since 18.11.2019, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Maner P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32844 of 2020(2) dt.08-12-2020 3/3
Case No.515 of 2019 on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Danapur.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted regular bail in the money dispute case involving alleged cheating and cheque dishonour.
Whether charges are maintainable in view of the money dispute nature and the petitioner showing willingness to furnish bail bond and sureties.
Whether the conditions of bail bond and sureties should be directed to satisfy the learned Judicial Magistrate.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ram Babu Rai
The State of Bihar
Deo Kumar Singh
Partha Sarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
