Allowed

Sachin Bharti v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Sept 2024CR. MISC./26492/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted anticipatory bail to Sachin Bharti in a complaint case alleging cheating and cheque dishonour. The court considered the allegations of forged agreement and bounced cheques while allowing the application.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner released on bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks by furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Sachin Bharti Vs The State of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26492 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-854 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna

¶3

====================================================== Sachin Bharti Son of Dular Chandra Singh R/o - Bindula Bhawan, Flat No. 1460 Lakhni Bigaha, Post- Khagaul, P.S.- Danapur, Dist.- Patna

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

Narwada Prasad Sahu Son of Late Nagina Sah R/o Naya Gaw, Dist.- Saran, Bihar- 841217, Local Address - Vibhakar Mishra, Post- Khagaul, P.S.Danapur, Dist.- Patna

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Prabhakar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 18-09-2024

¶13

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Complaint Case No. 854( C ) of 2022, disclosing offences under Sections 406, 417 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

3. As per the allegation made in the complaint, the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 12 lacs to the petitioner for his personal use for which an agreement on stamp paper dated 16.06.2022 was executed between the complainant and the petitioner. It has further been alleged that on 16.06.2022, the petitioner gave two cheques of ICICI Bank dated 01.07.2022 for Rs. 3,64,000/- and Rs. 4,50,000/- respectively but both the cheques bounced on presentation.

¶17

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that on bare perusal of the complaint, no offence much less criminal

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26492 of 2024(3) dt.18-09-2024 2/3

¶19

offence is made out. The allegation against the petitioner is that money was given by the complainant under an agreement which the petitioner failed to return. Learned counsel next submits that there was a business relationship between the petitioner and the complainant inasmuch as the petitioner is a certified share broker and the complainant used to invest in shares and due to loss incurred by the complainant, he prepared a forged agreement dated 16.06.2022 having the forged signature of the petitioner. The photograph pasted on the agreement has been taken from the facebook. Learned counsel further submits that on 16.06.2022, the complainant along with others entered into the house of the petitioner and took two cheques from him forcibly for which a legal notice was served by the petitioner upon complainant on 18.06.2022. Thereafter, on 15.07.2022, the complainant has filed the present complaint.

¶20

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submits that two cheques were issued by the petitioner dated 01.07.2022 which bounced on presentation and as per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner had promised to return the amount paid by the complainant but he failed to return the same. Learned counsel next submits that conduct of the petitioner is not good inasmuch as he resides along with his

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26492 of 2024(3) dt.18-09-2024 3/3

¶22

father-in-law at Ranchi and his father-in-law has filed a complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 2809 of 2024 stating that petitioner is duping a large number of persons by showing himself as share broker.

¶23

6. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that both the parties have entered into an agreement for money transaction and as per the allegation, the petitioner failed to return the money and the cheques have been bounced, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶24

7. This application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶25

8. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Danapur, in connection with Complaint Case No. 854( C ) of 2022, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶26

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

Sachin Bharti v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Bharti 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

Pramod Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Tabbu Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Ashish Ranjan Kumar @ Ashish Kr Ranjan @ Assish Kumar Ranjan @ Assis Ranjan Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Saiyad Ali @ Shaiyad Ali Vs the State of Bihar

Dharmendra Mahto Vs The State of Bihar