Allowed

Md. Masleuddin Ansari @ Masleuddin Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC4 Sept 2024CR. MISC./55889/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Patna issued an oral order granting anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges of cheating and forgery. The court held the dispute to be primarily civil regarding a partnership agreement and authorized release on bail bonds within six weeks of arrest or surrender, subject to statutory conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties within six weeks of arrest.

Md. Masleuddin Ansari @ Masleuddin Ansari Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55889 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2023 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Masleuddin Ansari @ Masleuddin Ansari Son of Md. Salauddin Ansari @ Salauddin Ansari

¶5

Md. Salauddin Ansari @ Salauddin Ansari Son of Late Suleman Ansari Both are R/O Vill.- Kanhauli, P.S.- Jhanjharpur, Dist.- Madhubani.

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar

¶9

Abdul Jabbar Ansari Son of Late Nabbi Ansari R/O Vill.- Kanhauli, P.S.Jhanjharpur, Dist.- Madhubani.

¶10

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

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

¶12

Appearance :

¶13

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP

¶14

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

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 04-09-2024

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP for the State.

¶18

The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 420, 120(B), 468, 416, 406 of the IPC, later on cognizance has been taken under Sections 323, 341, 504, 420 and 34 of the IPC in connection with C.R. No.340 of 2023.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have antecedent of one case. It is further submitted that the complainant alleges that he was approached by the petitioners requesting him for investing money in a business related to brick-kiln. Further, an agreement was entered in

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55889 of 2024(2) dt.04-09-2024 2/3

¶21

between the petitioners and the complainant and the complainant invested an amount of rupees thirty five lakhs and the rest rupees thirty five lakhs was invested by the petitioner. It is further submitted that as per the agreement it was agreed that the profit would be shared equally, but then it is submitted that the petitioners cheated him by not paying his share of money which amounts to Rs.28,83,500/-.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the complaint, it would manifest that the complainant alleges that he entered into a partnership agreement with the petitioners in respect of a business relating to brick-kiln, in which it was agreed that the profit of the business shall be shared equally, but then the complainant did not received his share in the profit. It is next submitted that the dispute is purely civil to which a criminal colour has been given. It is also submitted that if complainant is aggrieved by the fact that the condition of the agreement has been breached, in that event, he has a remedy of recovering the amount by instituting a civil proceedings before a court of competent jurisdiction. It is also submitted that petitioners dispute the fanciful claim of the complainant. It is next submitted that the criminal case has been instituted only with a

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55889 of 2024(2) dt.04-09-2024 3/3

¶24

view to coerce the petitioners into submission, so that they easily accede to the fanciful demand of the complainant, but had the complainant moved before a court of competent civil jurisdiction, in that event petitioners would have rebutted his claim.

¶25

The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.

¶26

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum 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-I, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with C.R. No.340 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶27

The application stands allowed.

¶28

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶29

Prakash Narayan U T

Md. Masleuddin Ansari @ Masleuddin Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Masleuddin Ansari @ Masleuddin Ansari 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

Chintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Satendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Kumar @ Krish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kumar Amrit Raj Vs the Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Branch, S.K. Singh

Satyendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sonelal Khatabe @ Sonelal Chaupal @ Sonelal Khatbe Vs The State of Bihar