Patna High Court

Sudhanshu Kumar Sinha @ SudhanshuversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Anticipatory bail was refused.

Summary

The petitioner, Sudhanshu Kumar Sinha, was charged with offences under Sections 341, 323, 448, 420, 379, 354 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly cheating an informant by promising a private job, demanding money for a fictitious cancer treatment, and misappropriating funds amounting to Rs. 20,15,793. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence, a clean antecedent, and that the complaint was a ploy to avoid repayment of a loan. The State opposed the bail, presenting specific accusations that the petitioner cheated the informant of Rs. 2,15,000 and supporting documentary evidence. The Court examined the nature of the allegations and the material on record. Considering the seriousness of the charges and the evidence, the Court refused the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the alleged cheating and fraud offences.
Whether the material evidence presented by the State justifies denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 354, 379, 406, 420, 448

Subjects

anticipatory bail
cheating
fraud
Indian Penal Code
bail refusal
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10597 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-241 Year-2024 Thana- TILAUTHU District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Sudhanshu Kumar Sinha @ Sudhanshu Son of Sampat Kumar Sinha Resident
                 of Mohalla -Santoshi Maa Path Gaurakshni PO -and PS -Sasaram District
                 -Rohtas P/A- Residing at B-68, pandav nagar, D. Park, Ps- Mandawali, east
                 Delhi
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Akhouri Vipin Bihari Shrivastava, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Lalan Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   08-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 448, 420, 379, 354,

                   406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. Informant, namely, Shakuntala Devi alleged that her

                   daughter Sanskriti was staying in Sasaram for studies where her

                   classmate i.e. this petitioner and his cousin Aprajita assured her of

                   a private job in Delhi. After she started working, this petitioner

                   claimed that her cousin had cancer and demanded Rs. 10 lacs for

                   her treatment and later, convinced informant to deposit money into

                   Sanskriti’s account promising investment return but instead

                   withdrew Rs. 2,15,000/- using an OTP and misappropriated total

                   amount of Rs. 20.15,793/- including cash.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10597 of 2025(6) dt.08-01-2026
                                                          2/2




                        fact, this petitioner and the daughter of informant are friends and

                        she had taken Rs. 12,35,000/- on different times in different

                        accounts from the petitioner and when he demanded his money

                        back, she herself transferred Rs. 2,25,000/- out of Rs. 12,35,000/-

                        in the account of this petitioner. When petitioner again demanded

                        the remaining amount, she gave cheque worth Rs. 10 lacs bearing

                        Cheque No. 000002 dated 17.07.2024 which got bounced and

                        thus, petitioner sent her legal notice on 8.8.2024. Petitioner has

                        falsely been implicated in this case with a view to avoid repayment

                        of the remaining amount. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the

                        bail application and submitted that there is specific accusation that

                        this petitioner cheated informant of Rs. 2,15,000/- and in support

                        of the same, he has also placed some documentary evidence.

                                     6. Considering the nature of accusation and materials

                        available on record, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

                        refused.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…