Patna High Court
VIMLENDU KR. SINGH @ BIMLENDU SINGH @ B.K. SINGHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court held that the dispute is primarily civil and granted bail to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioner, Vimlendu Kr. Singh, was arrested in connection with a complaint alleging that he cheated an informant and her daughter of Rs 16 lakh by taking a loan and issuing a cheque that later bounced. The FIR was filed under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, although the defence argued that the dispute was essentially civil and should have been pursued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner sought bail, contending that the amount in dispute was Rs 6 lakh, which he was ready to pay, and that the matter was a loan recovery issue. The State opposed bail, maintaining that the cheque was dishonoured and the offence was cognizable. The Court, noting that the primary issue appeared to be a civil loan recovery and that the FIR was unwarranted, granted bail subject to a bond and sureties under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order directed the petitioner’s release pending trial in the Purnea Sessions Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNSS is appropriate for a cheque bounce dispute.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail pending trial.
- Whether the matter is civil in nature and should be dealt with under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Legislation cited
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- bail
- cheating
- civil dispute
- loan recovery
- cheque bounce
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- criminal procedure
- Section 316
- Section 318
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1187 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2024 Thana- Madhubani T District- Purnia
======================================================
Vimlendu Kr. Singh @ Bimlendu Singh @ B.K. Singh S/O Jayendra Kumar
Singh R/O Laxmipur, P.S.- Barhara Kothi, Dist- Purnia. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Pratima Devi W/o- Shankar Deo Jha, R/O- Shashtri Nagar, Sipahi Tola,
Ward No. 3, P.S.-Madhubani, Dist- Purnea.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
for the Informant : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
9 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant.
2. The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in
connection with Madhubani P.S. Case No. 95 of 2024 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of
Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita.
3. As per FIR, petitioner alleged to cheat informant and
her daughter to the tune of Rs. 16 lacs, where it appears that the
initial demand for money was made as a loan to return the same
within 2-3 months. It also alleged that the cheque which was given
on 26.08.2024, on presentation before the bank concerned was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1187 of 2025(9) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
dishonoured on 27.08.2024 in want of sufficient fund.
4. It is submitted by Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned senior
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that primarily the
dispute appears civil in nature. It is also submitted that in fact the
transaction was limited with Rs. 6 lacs, which petitioner is ready to
pay at any point of time. It is also submitted that a separate case
was filed by daughter of the informant also with same allegation.
In this context, it is submitted that proceedings in actual be
initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act for
dishounoring of the cheque but instead of same, straightway
present FIR was filed, which is completely unwarranted and
unoccassioned.
5. While arguing further, it submitted by Mr. Agrawal
that the informant/complainant may take steps in civil side to
recover the payment over 6 lacs, if it was made genuine to this
petitioner.
6. Learned APP, duly assisted by learned counsel Mr.
Amarnath Jha, appearing on behalf of the informant, while
opposing the prayer of bail submitted that in actual the payment
was made total of Rs. 16 lacs by the informant and her daughter
but as the original bond given by petitioner to the informant and
her daughter was collected by him, informant is not in position to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1187 of 2025(9) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
place the same before the court.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as primarily dispute appears civil in nature,
related with recovery of loan as given by the informant to the
petitioner, accordingly, above named petitioner, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court, within a period
of four weeks of the order, is directed to be released on bail
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned District and Sessions Judge-III, Purnea/concerned Court,
where the case is pending in connection with Madhubani P.S. Case
No. 95 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…