Patna High Court
Devendra Kumar Mishra @ Deo MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The High Court held that the dispute is essentially civil and directed referral to mediation with interim pre‑arrest bail, refraining from proceeding with the criminal complaint.
Summary
The petitioner, Devendra Kumar Mishra, sought protection from arrest in a criminal complaint filed by M/s Pawanand Marketing under Sections 406, 420 and 409 IPC alleging breach of trust and fraud. The dispute arose from an alleged outstanding amount of Rs. 4,51,335.07 relating to a business relationship that the petitioner contends is purely a civil commercial matter, with the complainant having issued fabricated bills and refusing to produce ledgers. The petitioner requested that the matter be referred to mediation and that he be released on pre‑arrest bail, arguing that criminal proceedings are an abuse of process. The State opposed the plea but did not contest the possibility of an amicable settlement. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents, held that the complaint appears to be a civil transaction cloaked in criminal language and therefore ordered the matter to be referred to the District Mediation Centre, directing the district court to issue notice and grant interim protection to the petitioner. The application for protection was disposed of, with directions for mediation and conditional bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the complaint under Sections 406, 420 and 409 IPC discloses a criminal offence or merely a civil commercial dispute.
- Whether the High Court can, under its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, direct mediation and grant pre‑arrest bail to prevent abuse of process.
- Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed or stayed pending settlement of the civil dispute.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 409, 420
Subjects
- criminal breach of trust
- civil commercial dispute
- mediation
- pre‑arrest bail
- abuse of process
- Section 406 IPC
- Section 482 CrPC
- quash of criminal proceedings
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10118 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5821 Year-2024 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Devendra Kumar Mishra @ Deo Mishra S/o- Sudhakar Mishra Resident of
Near Malahi pakri chowk P.S- Kankarbagh District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. M/s Pawanand Marketing through its Proprietor Sri Pawan Kumar R/v-
Lohiya Nagar Ps- Patrakar Nagar Dist- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rohan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard Mr. Rohan Kumar, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1,
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Complaint Case No. 5821(C) of 2024 registered under
Sections 406, 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the allegation made in the complaint, the
complainant and the petitioner had engaged in a business
relationship since 2016 and they were well acquainted with each
other. The complainant carries on business of pet food products
under the name M/S Pawananand Marketing as a wholesaler of
pedigree items, while the accused, Gajendra Kumar Mishra,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10118 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/6
operates a retail business under the proprietorship firm Pets
World. Both parties maintained cordial business relations and
conducted transactions in good faith until August 2021.
Thereafter the complainant started delaying payments, and as
per the complainant’s ledger an amount of Rs. 4,51,335.07/-
remained outstanding from the last financial year. Despite
issuance of a legal notice demanding payment, the said amount
was not cleared, which lead to the institution of the present case.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has
falsely been implicated in the case. The criminal proceedings
arising out of Complaint Case No. 5821(C) of 2024, in which
cognizance was taken under Sections 406 IPC, have been
initiated without proper appreciation of facts and in misuse of
the criminal process. The petitioner had regularly made
payments to the complainant and his Market Representative
through both cash and online modes, however, the complainant
has allegedly made false and misleading claims and issued
fabricated bills, not only in relation to the petitioner but also
with other shopkeepers. Despite repeated requests by the
petitioner for production of both his ledger and the company’s
official ledger, as well as, adjustment of amounts relating to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10118 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/6
sales returns, the complainant failed to furnish the same and
allegedly threatened the petitioner. The complainant had similar
disputes with other traders, due to which the company
ultimately terminated his dealership. The petitioner points out
that the complainant himself admitted certain outstanding
figures in the complaint petition, while several payments made
by the petitioner during the year 2022, though acknowledged in
the complaint, were not reflected in the ledger. The bills were
raised for goods that were never received by the petitioner. The
petitioner asserts his willingness to settle the matter on the basis
of the company’s official ledger after due adjustment of returned
goods, contending that the dispute arises out of a contractual
business transaction and is purely civil in nature, for which a
criminal proceeding under Section 406 is not maintainable. The
matter primarily relates to monetary transaction between the
parties and for amicable settlement of dispute between the
parties outside the Court, the matter be referred for mediation.
5. Per contra, learned APP appearing on behalf of the
State submitted that a chance be given to the parties for
amicable settlement outside the court.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10118 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
4/6
agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M.
on 24.03.2026.
7. Heard the parties
8. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the F.I.R., I am of the opinion that an opportunity is
required to be given to the parties to settle their score amicably
outside the Court.
9. In this regard, I find it apt to take note of the
observation made by the Apex Court in case of Paramjeet
Batra v. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2013) 11 SCC 673,
in which, the Apex Court in paragraph no. 12 has held as
follows:
"12. While exercising its jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Code the High Court has to
be cautious. This power is to be used sparingly and
only for the purpose of preventing abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of
justice. Whether a complaint discloses a criminal
offence or not depends upon the nature of facts
alleged therein. Whether essential ingredients of
criminal offence are present or not has to be judged
by the High Court. A complaint disclosing civil
transactions may also have a criminal texture. But
the High Court must see whether a dispute which is
essentially of a civil nature is given a cloak of
criminal offence. In such a situation, if a civil
remedy is available and is, in fact, adopted as has
happened in this case, the High Court should not
hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings to
prevent abuse of process of the court."
(emphasis supplied)
10. The Apex Court has reiterated the aforesaid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10118 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
5/6
proposition in recent judgment of S. N. Vijayalakshmi & Ors.
vrs. The State of Karnataka and Anr. reported in (2025) SCC
Online SC 1575.
12. The petitioner has willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on or before 24.03.2026, so
that the matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
13. Learned District Court is directed to issue notice
to O.P. No.2 and take necessary steps to refer the matter before
the learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center by fixing
a date for appearance of the parties to give effect to “Mediation
for the Nation 2.0”.
14. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned, upon appearance of the parties, shall make his/her
best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and thereafter submit
his/her report before the concerned learned District Court, well
within a period of three months, till then, no coercive action
shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with the
aforesaid case.
15. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
the Apex Court as referred hereinabove, the petitioner is
required to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10118 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
6/6
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
16. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 24.03.2026 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall automatically lose its force.
17. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
complainant to reconcile, then in that case, the interim
protection granted to the petitioner shall continue and the trial
shall proceed in accordance with law.
18. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner
is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
19. If both the parties arrive at amicable settlement,
then they must withdraw the criminal cases, if any, which they
have lodged against each other.
20. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.