Abdurrahman @ Abdur Rahman v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72133 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2500 Year-2023 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- West Champaran ====================================================== Abdurrahman @ Abdur Rahman Son of Sheikh Mohammad Aamil R/OVillage- Semri, PS- Sathi, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Virendra Sharma Son of Late Prabhunarayan Sharma R/O-Village- Semri, Ward No. 6, PS- Sathi, District- West Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.

Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta- Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-03-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N. I. Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the complaint, it would manifest that the dispute is purely civil to which a criminal colour has been given. It is also submitted that offence under Section 138 of the N. I. Act is bailable and in the nature of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72133 of 2024(3) dt.22-03-2025 2/3 allegation as alleged in the complaint, no offence under Section 420 IPC is made. It is next submitted that in sum and substance, the allegation is that the complainant alleges that petitioner had taken a loan of Rs.3 Lacs for starting a business, but the amount was not returned in lieu of which, a cheque was issued which on presentation for encashment bounced. It is submitted that petitioner has his own defence, but then, prima facie no offence under Section 420 pf the IPC is made out. It is also submitted that in the event, if the complainant is able to prove his case before the learned trial Court, the petitioner will suffer the consequences.

4. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner, but then, are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that in the nature of allegation, no offence under Section 420 IPC is made out.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72133 of 2024(3) dt.22-03-2025 3/3 Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Md. Sarwar Ansasri, the learned J.M., 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Complaint Case No.2500 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

6. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T