Dipeeka Dutta @ Dipika Dutta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80697 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2142 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Dipeeka Dutta @ Dipika Dutta Daughter of Rabindra Dutta Proprietor of M/s. MMS Enterprises, Resident of 120 D, Kolkata 31, P.S. - Kasba, Sarat Ghosh Garden Road, Dhakuria - 700031, presently residing at 115/45, Bose Pukur Road Tiljala, South 24 Parganas, P.S. - Kasba, District - West Bengal - 700039 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Subhasis Gayen Son of L.N. Gyaen Resident of 4/16, Rocky Path, P.S. - Sakhspur, Sarani, Durgapur, posted as Sales Executive of Supreme Industries Limited, at present residing at Patna, One Mall Dakbungalow Road Crossing near Maurya Lok Complex, 7th Floor, Room No. 701 and 709, P.S. - Pirbahore, P.O. - G.P.O., District - Patna 3.

Supreme Industries Limited Represented through its Managing Director namely Mahavir Prasad Surajmal Taparia having its registered address at 612, Raheja Chambersnariman Point, P.S. and P.O. - Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India - 400021 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Shankar Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-02-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Criminal Complaint No. 2142(c) of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1882.

3. The prosecution case is that the complainant is the sales staff of M/s Supreme Industries Ltd. and the petitioner is a dealer.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80697 of 2024(3) dt.07-02-2025 2/2 The complaint supllied furniture worth Rs. 10,41,753/- to the petitioner. She issued cheque of the same amount which was dishonoured by the Bank.

4. Earlier the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been dismissed vide order dated 17.08.2022 in Cr. Misc. No. 50330 of 2021.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to Business and Civil dispute pertaining between the petitioner and the complainant. He has submitted that the cheque was given by the petitioner to the complainant in security in the year 2010. He has also submitted that the goods were to be supplied from Durgapur to Kasba.

6. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected in 2022 again she filed the application for anticipatory bail after two years. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail, which is hereby rejected. She is directed to surrender before the Court below and make a prayer for regular bail.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Neha/- U T