Arun Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48788 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2017 Thana -ASHOK PAPER MILL District- DARBHANGA ======================================================

1. ARUN CHOUDHARY son of Late Rameshwar Choudhary Resident of village - Sahora, P.S. - Ashok Paper Mill, Dist - Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bikram Singh Mr. Kaushal Kumar For the State : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-11-2017 Heard the parties.

This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of A.P.M. P.S. Case No. 86/2017, disclosing offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be, prima facie, correct in his submission that in view of specific provision under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, the First Information Report could not have been registered with the police making allegation of commission of offence under Section 138 of the said Act.

Learned counsel for the informant, on the other

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48788 of 2017 (2) dt.16-11-2017 2/3 hand, has submitted that the police upon completion of investigation has submitted charge-sheet for commission of offence punishable under Section 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of N.I. Act. He has submitted that in the aforesaid circumstances, the anticipatory bail of the petitioner may not be allowed.

From perusal of the F.I.R., I find that there is allegation that the informant had given certain amount to the petitioner on credit, which the petitioner refused to return initially and subsequently issued the said cheque which stood dishonoured for insufficiency of fund in account.

I my view, case for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed on the basis of the nature of allegation in the F.I.R. Considering the facts aforesaid, this application is allowed. Let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection with A.P.M. P.S. Case No. 86/2017, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48788 of 2017 (2) dt.16-11-2017 3/3 This is subject to the condition that the petitioner shall present himself before the police/Court, as the case may be, as and when required and in the event of failure on his part to appear before the Court on two consecutive occasions, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Rakhi U T