Patna High CourtCR. MISC./35609/2024dismissed

Suresh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-16Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35609 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2021 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== Suresh Prasad Son of Yogendra Prasad R/o Vill.- Katkenwa, Bhawanipur Bazar, P.S.- Nakardei, Dist.- East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Rajiv Kumar Dubey Son of Late Hari Kishore Dubey R/O Vill.- Bhaluahia, P.S.- Adapur, Dist.- East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP For the Complainant :

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2025 Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant as well as Mr. Dinesh Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. C-74 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the NI Act.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner took Rs. 24,00,000/- from the complainant for some personal work and for which the petitioner has given him 5 cheques worth Rs. 24,00,000/- but when the complainant presented all these

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35609 of 2024(5) dt.16-04-2025 2/3 cheques in the Bank, all the cheques became dishonored. It is further alleged that when complainant demanded his money back from the petitioner then this petitioner along with other accused persons abused and assaulted the complainant and also snatched gold chain from his neck.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the complaint petition is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the complaint petition.

5. Pursuant to the direction of this Court vide order dated 31.07.2024, the matter was referred to Patna High Court Mediation Centre for settlement of dispute between the parties. Report of the learned Mediator dated 22.10.2024 reveals that the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that the despite undertaking given before this Court or before the learned Mediator, the petitioner has not paid any single amount to the complainant and today when the matter was called out, learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35609 of 2024(5) dt.16-04-2025 3/3 outrightly submits that the petitioner is not ready to pay single amount to the complainant.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

8. In view of the aforesaid, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Complaint Case No. C-74 of 2021 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act), East Champaran, Motihari.

9. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T