Patna High Court
Ram Nath RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The bail bond of Opposite Party No.2 is cancelled as he failed to comply with the conditions of the anticipatory bail, including the payment undertaking.
Summary
Ram Nath Ray filed a petition seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to Om Prakash Gupta (Opposite Party No.2) in connection with a loan of Rs.41 lakhs, a bounced cheque and alleged non‑payment of instalments under a settlement mediated by the court. The petitioner claimed that despite an undertaking to pay Rs.19 lakhs in 19 instalments, only Rs.2 lakhs had been paid and the accused had defaulted. The court noted that the anticipatory bail was conditioned on compliance with the payment schedule and that the petitioner could move for cancellation if any instalment was missed. Considering the default and the breach of the mediated settlement, the court held that the conditions of bail were violated. Consequently, the bail bond of Opposite Party No.2 was cancelled and the police were directed to produce him before the court. The application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail granted to Opposite Party No.2 can be cancelled on account of non‑compliance with the payment undertaking under the mediated settlement
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to cancellation of bail despite the earlier confirmation of provisional bail for the petitioner
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cancellation of bail
- loan default
- cheque bounce
- mediation settlement
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15674 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2023 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ram Nath Ray S/O Late Dwarika Ray R/O Vill.- Rusulpur Fatah, P.O-
Rasulpur Fatah,P.S- Mahua, Dist.- Vaishali, Pin- 802101
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Om Prakash Gupta @ Umesh Prasad Gupta s/o Banarasi Prasad Gupta @
Banarasi Gupta R/O Vill.- Mahua Singhrai, P.S- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali at
Hajipur, Pin- 802101
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyanendra Kumar Shukla, Advocate
Mr. Shailendra Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
9 23-04-2026 Heard, Mr. Gyanendra Kumar Shukla, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Madan Kumar, Learned A.P.P.
for the State.
2. Despite valid service of notice no one appeared on
behalf of the O.P. No. 2.
3. The present case has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the
Opposite Party No. 2 by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated
05.03.2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 70090 of 2023 in
connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 372 of 2023.
4. Allegation against the Opposite Party No. 2 is of
taking Rs. 41 lakhs as loan from the petitioner but he did not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15674 of 2025(9) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
return the same to the petitioner. A cheque was given to the
petitioner by Om Prakash Gupta, which was bounced.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner despite
undertaking given before the learned Mediator as well as this
Hon’ble Court, the petitioner has not paid any amount after
paying of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lakh) out of Rs. 19,00,000/-
(nineteen lakhs). Learned counsel for the petitioner states that
O.P. No. 2 agreed to pay Rs. 20,00,000/- (twenty lakhs) to the
petitioner but he had paid only Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lakhs) till
date. The relevant portion of the order passed by this Hon’ble
Court is quoted herein below:
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean
antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case.
5. Pursuant to the direction of this
Hon’ble Court dated 01.11.2023, the
matter was referred to Patna High
Court, Medication Centre for settle the
dispute between the parties. Report of
the learned Mediator dated 27.02.2024
reveals that the matter has been settled
between the parties and the petitioner
is ready to pay Rs. 20,00,000/- (Twenty
Lakhs) and out of Twenty Lakhs the
petitioner has paid Rs. 1,00,000/- (One
lakh) to the complainant/Informant and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15674 of 2025(9) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
he has given an undertaking to pay Rs.
19,00,000/- (Nineteen Lakhs) in 19
(nineteen) equal installments within a
period of nineteen months.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the
provisional bail granted to the
petitioner vide order dated 01.11.2023
is hereby confirmed in connection with
Mahua P.S. Case No. 372 of 2023.
7. Learned counsel for the Informant
shall be at liberty to move for
cancellation of anticipatory bail of the
petitioner, if the petitioner will not pay
any installment amount in any month
as he has given an undertaking in the
agreement dated 26.02.2024 before the
learned Mediator in the medication
proceedings.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, the bail bond of the
Opposite Party No. 2 is cancelled and learned Court below is
directed to cancel the bail bond of the Opposite Party No. 2 and
Superintendent of Police, Vaishali is directed to produce the O.P.
No. 2 before the learned Court below.
7. This application is disposed of.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…