Dismissed¶¶31

Vivek Raj v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Apr 2025CR. MISC./80110/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC petition dismissed; quashing of bail-cancellation order dated 28.02.2024 refused; bail earlier granted vide B.P. No. 1084/2022 dated 16.09.2022; Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 303/2022, Patna; offences under Ss. 406, 420, 465, 467, 471/34 IPC and S. 138 Negotiable Instrument Act; onerous bail condition argument based on Sumit Mehta v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2013) 15 SCC 570 not accepted; petitioner found to have made false statement before trial court and absconding since about one year; breach of undertaking; Patna High Court, Coram: Chandra Shekhar Jha, J., decision dated 24-04-2025.

What did the court decide?

It appears prima facie that the petitioner made a false statement before the learned trial court while making submissions in B.P. No. 1084/2022, and till date he is also absconding. ¶¶30

Vivek Raj Vs The State of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80110 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2022 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Vivek Raj Son of Arun Kumar Singh R/)-Mohalla - Nawal Kishore Road, Vivek Vihar High School, Kadamkuan, P.S.- Kadamkuan District- Patna

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Priti Kumari Wife of Kumar Vikram Resident of 2L/81, Bahadurpur Housing Colony, P.S.- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna

¶9

... ... Opposite Party

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kumar Rishikesh Chanchal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP Mr.Vijay Shankar Srivastava, Advocate

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT

¶15

Date : 24-04-2025

¶16

Heard Mr. Kumar Rishikesh Chanchal, learned counsel

¶17

for the petitioner and Mr. Vijay Shankar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

¶18

The present petition preferred under Section 482 of

¶19

the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the ‘Cr.P.C.’) as to quash/set-aside the order dated 28.02.2024 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge – 1^st , Patna City,

¶20

in connection with Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 303/2022, registered for the offence under section 406, 420, 465, 467 and 471/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 138 of the Negotiable

¶21

Instrument Act, whereby and whereunder learned court has

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80110 of 2024 dt.24-04-2025 2/3

¶23

cancelled the bail of the petitioner, which was earlier allowed vide B.P. No. 1084/2022 dated 16.09.2022.

¶24

It is submitted by Mr. Kumar Rishikesh Chanchal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that condition imposed by the learned trial court while granting bail to the petitioner was onerous and not sustainable in the eyes of law in view of the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available through Sumit Mehta Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2013) 15 SCC 570, and, therefore, it is fit to be quashed/set-aside.

¶25

Mr. Vijay Shankar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 submitted that condition was imposed on the basis of undertaking and submission of the petitioner and after obtaining the bail, petitioner stopped to honour his own undertaking and submission as given before the learned trial court while obtaining bail through B.P. No. 1084/2022 dated 16.09.2022, arising out of Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 303 of 2022.

¶26

It appears that when petitioner stopped payment in

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80110 of 2024 dt.24-04-2025 3/3

¶28

view of his own undertaking, bis bail bond was cancelled on 28^th February, 2024.

¶29

At this stage, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 that petitioner is absconding since last one year.

¶30

In view of the aforesaid, it appears prima-facie that petitioner made false statement before learned trial court while making submissions in B.P. No. 1084/2022, as discussed aforesaid and till date he is also absconding.

¶31

Considering the aforesaid, the present petition devoid of any merit. The same stands dismissed.

¶32

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶33

Rajeev/-

¶34

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	24.04.2025
Transmission Date	24.04.2025

Vivek Raj v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Raj v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Taufique @ Taufik Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Dilip Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Anita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Abhimanyu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dr. Mamta Sinha Vs The State of Bihar