Patna High Court considered a bail application in a private complaint case alleging cheating and cheque dishonour. The court examined the prosecution case, the petitioner's claim of innocence, and the evidence regarding complicity in the case diary.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
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.8082 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2022 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad
======================================================
KANHAI KUMAR Son of Ram Bali Prasad @ Ram Bali Das R/v- Paraiya, P.S.- Paraiya, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajit Ranjan Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Gulnar Begum, APP. Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Adv. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER
3 25-08-2023 Heard the parties.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8082 of 2023(3) dt.25-08-2023 2/4
approached the complainant at his house and asked him to invest money in said two companies and both of them assured him that in lieu of his invested money, he would get an interest of 18%. Thereafter, the complainant approached to his brotherin-law, namely, Md. Mahfuz Alam who also assured him about the merits and benefits of investing money in the said companies and told that his father Md. Suleman was also a founder of the said companies. Subsequently, in the years 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, the complainant, in total, invested Rs. 12,60,000/- in both the companies through bank transfer, but after a lapse of 2-3 months, when the complainant started asking his money back, the accused persons started making excuses. Finally, in the months of July-August 2021, when the complainant went to Jamshedpur where the main branch of said companies was situated, he discovered that both the companies were closed and some of the accused persons were absconded. Thereafter, when the complainant threatened accused persons to register case against them, co-accused Md. Imran and Satendra Prasad came at the house of the informant and handed over a cheque of Rs. 12,60,000/- of Axis Bank, Mango, Jamshedpur to the complainant but when the complainant produced the said cheque before bank, the same was returned by saying that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8082 of 2023(3) dt.25-08-2023 3/4
concerned account was running in minus balance. Thereafter, the complainant sent a legal notice to all the accused persons whereupon accused Md. Suleman told the complainant that all the allegations are true and he is ready to record his evidence in favour of the complainant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8082 of 2023(3) dt.25-08-2023 4/4
complicity of the petitioner in the present case.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)
divyanshi/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case involving offences under Sections 406, 420 IPC and Section 138 NI Act.
Whether the complicity of the petitioner as found in the case diary warrants denial of bail.
Whether the allegations are false and concocted as submitted by the petitioner's counsel.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
KANHAI KUMAR
The State of Bihar
MD. SHAMSHER ALAM
ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
