← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9041/2026withdrawn

Ram Prakash Pandey @ Rama Prakash Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-22Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9041 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6397 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.

Ram Prakash Pandey @ Rama Prakash Pandey son of Sri Murlidhar Pandey Resident of P -214, Lake Town, Block A North 24, Parganas Police StationLake Town, Kolkata 700089, West Bengal, Director of M/S ASCAN PLYBOARD INDIA PVT. LTD 2.

Satya Prakash Pandey Son of Sri Murlidhar Pandey Resident of P -214, Lake Town, Block A 24, Parganas Police Station- Lake Town, Kolkata 700089, West Bengal, Director of M/S ASCAN PLYBOARD INDIA PVT. LTD ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Rishikesh Chanchal, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.6397 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 406, 420 IPC and 138 of the N.I. Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for quashing of the order of cognizance passed in Complaint Case No.6397 of 2023 by the court below, the petitioner has filed a quashing application bearing Cr. Misc. No.19860 of 2025. The said criminal miscellaneous application was heard on 13.02.2026 by this Court and further proceedings of the complaint case has been ordered to remain stayed qua the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9041 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026 2/2 petitioner.

4. Since the further proceedings have been stayed by this Court, there is no apprehension of arrest, and therefore, this application is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail in case the stay order is vacated or if the quashing application filed by the petitioner is dismissed.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Prakash Narayan U T