Patna High Court
Niraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Niraj Kumar, faced a complaint (Case No. 1919 of 2022) alleging offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheating and issuing bounced cheques in a land transaction. He claimed to have paid part of the consideration and offered to pay the remaining Rs 9,10,000 in installments, seeking anticipatory bail to avoid arrest. The complainant disputed some of the payments but did not oppose bail if the petitioner complied with his payment proposal. The Court, noting the petitioner’s willingness to pay and the fairness of the parties’ stance, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 10,000 bail bond, two sureties, and several conditions including regular court appearances and non‑interference with witnesses. The order also empowered the complainant to seek cancellation of the bail bond upon breach of the conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 406, 420 IPC and 138 NI Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s proposed payment schedule and undertakings satisfy the criteria for anticipatory bail.
- What conditions, if any, should be imposed on the anticipatory bail to protect the interests of the complainant and the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal breach of trust
- cheating
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- bail conditions
- payment installment
- complaint case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13119 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1919 Year-2022 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Samastipur
======================================================
Niraj Kumar S/o- Vansh Mani Rai @ Vansh Mani Mahto @ Vansh Vani Rai
Resident of village- Bindgama, Police Station- Patori, District-Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shashi Kumar Sharma S/o- Late Ram Lolin Sharma R/v- Dharampur
Dakhali Ps- Tajpur Halai OP Dist- Samastipur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
6 24-06-2026 Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner, the state as also Mr. Mahendra Pratap for the
informant.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 1919 of 2022 dated
17.11.2022 for offences under sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C
and 138 N.I Act.
3. As per the complaint, for a piece of land, the
accused agreed to pay Rs.13,60,000/- as consideration amount,
issued two cheques of Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.1,50,000/- and
further assured of making rest of the payment. However, while
the two cheques bounced, no further payment made, feeling
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13119 of 2026(6) dt.24-06-2026
2/4
cheated, the complaint case.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that though certain confusion took place, he is ready to
pay the amount. The submission is that subsequently on
29.05.2019 (Rs.2,50,000/-), on 23.10.2019 (Rs.50,0005/-), on
21.10.2019 (Rs.1,50,000/-) totalling Rs.4,50,000/- were cleared
but the same have not found place in the complaint.
5. Further submission is that he is ready to pay the rest
of the Rs. 9,10,000/- in following manner:
(i) Rs. 2,10,000/- at the time of execution of
bail bond;
(ii) Rs. 1,00,000/- each, every month for
seven months (totalling Rs. 7,00,000/- beginning
10th of August 2026 and ending 10th of February
2027);
(iii) failure to make payment, the
complainant shall be free to take steps for
cancellation of his bail bond.
6. Though learned counsel for the complainant, who
has appeared, disputes certain payments and submits that when
he is making payment to the tune of Rs.9,10,000/- reserving his
right to take the matter to its logical conclusion in the complaint
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13119 of 2026(6) dt.24-06-2026
3/4
petition, if relief is granted to him, he do not have any objection.
7. Taking into account the fair stand taken by the
parties, as also that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.9,10,000/-
as recorded above, the complaint is there, he shall be facing the
music, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him
privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. It is made clear that failure to abide by the
undertaking that has been given by the petitioner, the
complainant shall be free to take recourse for the cancellation of
his bail bond.
9. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in
connection with Complaint Case No. 1919 of 2022 subject to
the following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13119 of 2026(6) dt.24-06-2026
4/4
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
sanny/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.