Patna High CourtCR. MISC./5495/2023dismissed

Anjali Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

2024-03-04Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5495 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1407 Year-2019 Thana- NALANDA COMPLAINT CASE District- Nalanda ====================================================== Anjali Kumari W/O Rakesh Ranjan R/v- Bhadwa, P.S.- Rahui, DistrictNalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Satyendra Kumar S/o Rajendra Pd. R/v- Bhadw, P.S.- Rahui, DistrictNalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh Mr. Anirudh Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This application has been filed for quashing only part of the order dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure - 5) passed by learned J.M. 1st Class, Nalanda at Biharsharif in Complaint Case No. 1407C/2019 whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay 20% of the total amount to the complainant after granting bail to her (petitioner) in the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has never taken any loan from the complainant and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Entire amount of principal as well as interest was paid to the complainant and petitioner told him to return her two blank cheques and non-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5495 of 2023(4) dt.04-03-2024 2/2 judicial stamp paper, on which, she had put her signature, upon which, the complainant denied to return the same, due to which, some altercation took place between them, as a result of which, this false and concocted complaint has been filed by the complainant only with a view to humiliate and harass the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant / O.P.-2 vehemently opposes and submits that there is specific allegation against this petitioner that the cheques, given by this petitioner, bounced due to insufficient fund. Petitioner is author of the said cheques.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned warranting any interference by this Court.

6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T