Bihari Lal Rai @ Biharilal Roy v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67775 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-440 Year-2019 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Samastipur ====================================================== BIHARI LAL RAI @ BIHARILAL ROY Son of Shiv Nandan Roy R/vJitwapur, Nizamat, Ward No. 7, Near- Prabhat Pustkalay, Post- Samastipur, P.S.- Samastipur Mufassil, District- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

UMESH RAY Son of Late Monelal Ray R/v- Magardahi, Ward No. 29, Post and District- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the complainant alleges that the petitioner had taken an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- in the year 2006 for which he had issued seven cheques totalling Rs.2,40,000/- which were dishonoured on presentation for encashment resulting in filing of the present complaint petition.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67775 of 2022(7) dt.26-06-2023 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act is bailable and no offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out, it is further submitted that petitioner is disputing the issuance of cheques, however in the event, if the complainant is able to prove his case in the trial, the petitioner will suffer the consequences.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

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 from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Samastipur Complaint Case No. 440 of 2019 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T