Allowed¶20

Ramesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Apr 2024CR. MISC./15383/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted - forgery, cheating and criminal breach of trust alleged against employee of loan-providing company; IPC Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471; Motipur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023, Muzaffarpur; alleged defalcation of Rs. 10,10,762/- via forged documents for 25 loanees; defence plea of civil accounting dispute and documentary evidence; 6 months custody since 21.10.2023; no criminal antecedent; charge-sheet submitted; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two like sureties before ACJM II, Muzaffarpur; decided 24-04-2024 by Justice Partha Sarthy.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted; petitioner to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Muzaffarpur. ¶20

Ramesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arraigned in Motipur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC for allegedly getting forged documents prepared for 25 loanees and defalcating Rs. 10,10,762/-, should be enlarged on regular bail.

¶14

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the nature of the allegation in the FIR, the petitioner's custody of over 6 months since 21.10.2023, absence of any criminal antecedent, and submission of the charge-sheet, the petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Motipur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Muzaffarpur.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Partha Sarthy, J.) allowed a regular bail application in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 15383 of 2024 arising out of Motipur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2023 (District Muzaffarpur), registered under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, an employee of a loan-providing company, misusing his position got forged documents prepared with respect to 25 loanees and defalcated Rs. 10,10,762/-. The defence characterised the matter as a civil dispute relating to accounting with primarily documentary evidence already in the prosecution's possession. Considering the nature of the allegations, custody of over six months since 21.10.2023, absence of criminal antecedents and submission of the charge-sheet, the Court enlarged the petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Muzaffarpur.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15383 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2023 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Ramesh Kumar S/o Sujeet Sah R/o vill - Mushahari Tola, ward no. 1 Bhagwanpur Chakshekhu, P.S. - Dalsinghsarai, Distt. - Samastipur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 24-04-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

The petitioner has preferred this application for

¶14

grant of regular bail in connection with Motipur P.S. Case no.214 of 2023 registered under sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, the informant states that he is the Regional Manager of a company which is involved in providing loan to entrepreneurs. It is stated that the petitioner who was employed with the company, misusing his position, got forged documents prepared with respect to 25 loanees and defalcated a sum of Rs. 10,10,762/-.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case for oblique reasons. No such occurrence as alleged has taken place. It is the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15383 of 2024(3) dt.24-04-2024 2/2

¶18

case of purely civil dispute relating to accounting. In any case of the matter, the evidence is primarily documentary in nature which is already in possession of the prosecution. The petitioner is in custody for 6 months since 21.10.2023 and has no criminal antecedent. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

¶19

The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation against the petitioner in the FIR together with the petitioner having remained in custody for over 6 months since 21.10.2023, not having any criminal antecedent and charge-sheet having been submitted in the case, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Motipur P.S. Case no.214 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Muzaffarpur.

¶21

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶22

Shiv/-

Ramesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

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

Adya Prasad @ Adaya Prasad Singh Vs Ratan Gupta

Ranjeet Yadav @ Ranjit Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Madhuri Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Vinod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Kumar @ Shiva Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Dulare @ Sahil Vs The State of Bihar