Allowed

Ranveer Kumar v. The state of bihar

Patna HC22 Feb 2023CR. MISC./63177/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought under Sections 406, 420, 506 IPC and Section 138 NI Act arising from a loan of Rs.4,64,000/- with a dishonoured cheque. Considering custody period and submission of charge sheet, bail granted on bond with two sureties and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on bond of Rs.20,000/- with two like sureties before CJM, Khagaria, subject to Section 437(3) CrPC conditions.

Ranveer Kumar Vs The state of bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63177 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-318 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ranveer Kumar S/O Prabhu Prasad Yadav Resident of village- Purvi Thatha, P.S- Manasi, Distt- Khagariya

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The state of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 22-02-2023

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Khagaria P.S. Case No. 318 of 2022 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 406, 420, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of N.I. Act.

¶15

As per prosecution case, the informant extended loan of Rs.4,64,000/- to the petitioner and petitioner issued a cheque for the loan amount which was dishonoured for want of fund. Thereafter, despite repeated reminders, the petitioner refused to make the payment of his dues and also threatened the informant.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63177 of 2022(2) dt.22-02-2023 2/3

¶18

case and occurrence as alleged has never taken place. The petitioner was having business transaction with the informant and the money transaction was disputed and there was no fraud and cheating. If the cheque issued by the petitioner was dishonoured, the informant has remedy available under the process of law or he should file civil suit for recovery of the said money. The petitioner is in custody since 26.05.2022 and charge sheet has been submitted. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the petitioner with intention to grab the money of the informant and for not making the payment of the loan amount of Rs.4,64,000/-, deliberately issued the cheque though he was having insufficient amount in his account and this shows his deliberate intention to cheat the informant.

¶20

Perused the records.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the case has been instituted for offences including one under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by lodging an FIR and further considering the period of custody of the petitioner and submission of charge sheet, the petitioner above

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63177 of 2022(2) dt.22-02-2023 3/3

¶23

named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria/concerned court in connection with Khagaria P.S. Case No. 318 of 2022, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the following conditions:

¶24

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

¶25

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below. (iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

¶26

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶27

DKS/-

¶28

U T

Ranveer Kumar v. The state of bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranveer Kumar v. The state of bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Usha Verma @ Manwarta Devi @ Manbarat Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Rupesh Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Arif Raja @ Md. Arib Raja Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Kumar @ Shaka @ Shyam Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Kiran Devi Vs The State of Bihar