Patna High Court
Mahesh DevversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioner, Mahesh Dev, was implicated in a criminal complaint alleging misappropriation of funds, fraud, and other offences arising from a dispute with his brother over a private limited company and a mortgaged flat. The complaint, filed under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, stemmed from a family disagreement regarding loan repayment and the partition of ancestral property. The petitioner argued that the matter was essentially a civil dispute that should have been resolved under the Companies Act or before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, and that the criminal case was filed to coerce him. He sought anticipatory bail to avoid arrest, citing a prior anticipatory bail order granted to his wife. The court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond and sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged fraud and misappropriation under the BNSS.
- Whether the criminal complaint is an appropriate remedy for a civil dispute concerning company management and property partition.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 316(2), 318(4), 336(1), 338, 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 482(2), 61(2)
- Companies Act
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- civil dispute
- company law
- loan default
- mortgage
- misappropriation
- Section 482
- BNSS
- family dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16438 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16082 Year-2024 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Mahesh Dev S/O Late Krishna Chandra Sah Resident of Mahesh Nagar, Road
no. 1, P.S- Patliputra, District- Patna, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dev Braham Sah S/O Late Krishna Chandra Sah R/O Mahesh Nagar, Road
No. 1, P.S- Patliputra, P.O- Keshari Nagar, Distt.- Patna, Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Adv
Mr.Puneet Siddhartha, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP
Md. Naushad Uzzoha, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel senior for the petitioner, Sri
Ramakant Sharma; learned A.P.P. for the State and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2),
318(4), 336(1), 338, 351(2), 351(3), 61(2) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that he along with his brother stated a private company in the
name of MDS Infra Nirman Pvt. Ltd. registered under the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16438 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/5
Companies Act and both were directors of the company, the
company took loan from Canara Bank, the Bank granted loan to
the company and the loan was secured by way of mortgage of
commercial flat No. 202 having built up area of 1204 sq. ft at
Paijat Business Centre, Fraser Road, Patna, further cash credit
loan facility was given to the company up to the extent of Rs. 30
lakhs, next alleges that mother of the complainant and the
petitioner, namely, Sandhya Devi was the owner of the flat no.
202, further Sandhya Devi died on 28-2-2020, who was the
guarantor of the loan, leaving behind 3 sons including the
complainant and the petitioner as her legal heirs, further
complainant and his brother Vishnu were of the view of freeing
the flat from mortgage after paying the loan amount, so that the
property could be partitioned amongst the three brothers, but the
petitioner did not agree and stopped paying the loan amount,
further complainant in April 2025 wrote a letter to the Bank for
ending the old Board resolution and to create a new Board of
Directors, further complainant received an e-mail from the
company that petitioner is intending to induct his wife (Jyoti) as
Director of the company. It is further alleged that the petitioner
usurped Rs. 1 crore which was lying in the account of the
company for his own use, next alleges that cash credit of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16438 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/5
company was classified as NPA on 5-3-2022 and the flat was
put on auction by the Bank and the same was purchased by Jyoti
Devi for an amount of Rs. 46,16,000/- and the Bank again gave
loan of Rs. 17 lakhs against the said property, which amply
demonstrates the connivance of the Bank with the petitioner. It
is also alleged that petitioner had already filed a Title Partition
Suit No. 148 of 2021 for partitioning the ancestral property
including the mortgaged property claiming his one-third share in
the ancestral property.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the
complainant and the petitioner are own brothers and they had
formed a private limited company and had taken a loan from the
bank after mortgaging their ancestral flat in the name of their
mother. It is further submitted that it absolutely does not stand to
reason that as to why a criminal case was instituted with respect
to dispute which arose as alleged in the complaint. It is also
submitted that the right course for the complainant for getting
the issue resolved was through the procedure prescribed in the
Company Act or by approaching the DRT. It is further submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16438 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
4/5
that of late a tendency is growing to settle civil dispute by filing
criminal cases. It is next submitted that criminal cases are filed
with a view to coerce the accused into submission so that the
accused parts with the fanciful demand of the
informant/complainant. It is submitted that if what has been
alleged in the instant complaint is a correct fact, then the
complainant ought to have approached a court of competent
jurisdiction where petitioner also could have appeared and
would have got an opportunity to rebut the claim of the
complainant but then in criminal cases it is difficult for an
accused to put his defence as there is fear of arrest. It is also
submitted that Jyoti Devi had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 73450 of 2025 and the
same came to be allowed by an order dated 17-11-2025 passed
by a learned Co-ordinate Bench.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
senior counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in
the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16438 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
5/5
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
court where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Complaint Case No. 16082(C) of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…