Manoj Kumar Karn v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86791 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3373 Year-2024 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Karn S/O Late Ramchandra Lal R/O Village- Bara Jagannath, P.O- Bhikhanpur, P.S- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur presently Notary Public, Civil Court Campus, Near Office of the SDO, West, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Muzaffarpur Complaint Case No. 3373 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS and Section 138 of NI Act.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant has alleged that on 31.10.2023 the petitioner took a loan of Rs. 1,21,000/- from him and assured that the said amount would be repaid within a period of four months. However, the petitioner failed to return the amount within the stipulated time. Upon repeated demand, the accused issued a cheque

2/4 bearing No. 088211 for a sum of Rs. 1,21,000/- on 02.07.2024, which was subsequently dishonoured on 06.07.2024.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to the ulterior motive of complainant. When the cheque was given to the complainant, the account was in operation but due to the financial difficulties the petitioner could not make a transaction in the said account during the period of 2023-24 and the account was blocked by the bank of which the petitioner has no knowledge earlier and when the complainant sent a legal notice to him, he got knowledge of the fact that his account is blocked. As per para 3 of the bail petition, petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

6. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to repay the entire amount of Rs. 1,21,000/- to the complainant in a total of five installments, out of which the first installment of Rs. 50,000/- shall be paid at the time of

3/4 furnishing the bail bond. The remaining amount of Rs. 71,000/- shall be paid in four monthly installments of Rs. 17,750/- each. The petitioner is further ready and willing to file an affidavit before the Trial Court regarding the aforesaid payment schedule.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, and considering the bona fide intention of the petitioner, the instant bail application is allowed provisionally.

8. As per submission, petitioner shall file an affidavit regarding the above timeline of payment of entire amount i.e. Rs. 1,21,000/- at the time of furnishing of his bail bond.

9. Let the petitioner be released on provisional bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Muzaffarpur Complaint Case No. 3373 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., as also with the condition that one of the

4/4 bailors should be close relative of the petitioner.

10. Trial Court is directed to confirm the provisional bail granted to the petitioner after verifying the deposit receipts of payment of the entire amount i.e. Rs. 1,21,000/- by the petitioner to the complainant.

11. Accordingly, the instant application stands disposed of.

(S. B. Pd. Singh, J) Ankit Kumar/- U