Patna High Court
Balmiki KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner on the condition of payment of Rs.9 lakh within nine months and a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Summary
Balmiki Kumar was arrested in connection with a land‑sale dispute and charged under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for allegedly receiving Rs.16.01 lakh, issuing cheques of Rs.13 lakh that were dishonoured and failing to pay the balance in cash. He applied for bail, claiming innocence and offering to pay Rs.9 lakh to the complainant, while contending he had been in judicial custody since 22 January 2026. The State opposed bail, citing two prior criminal cases, whereas the complainant had no objection if the amount was paid within six months. The Court, after considering the facts, the petitioner’s willingness to pay, and the prior antecedents, granted bail on the condition that the petitioner pays Rs.9 lakh within nine months and furnishes a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 and NI Act section 138.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail.
- Whether the condition of payment of the disputed amount is a valid condition for bail.
- Whether the bail bond and surety requirements are sufficient.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- cheating
- forgery
- dishonour of cheques
- land sale dispute
- prior criminal antecedent
- surety
- Negotiable Instruments Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20598 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District-
Katihar
======================================================
Balmiki Kumar Son of Sudhir Prasad @ Sudhir Prasad Yadav @ Sudhir
Yadav R/o Banki - Basa, P.O. - Rupouli, P.S. - Rupouli, Dist. - Katihar, State -
Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sweta Kumari W/o Sanjay Choudhary R/o Musapur P.O. - Musapur, P.S. -
Korha, Dist. - Katihar, State - Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Advocate
Mrs. Rupa Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Abhigyan Kumar, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 31-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with
District Katihar Complaint Case No. 78 of 2024 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution based on the complaint
petition is that there was an agreement between the complainant
and the petitioner for the sale of a piece of land. It is alleged that
the petitioner has received Rs. 16,01,000/- and has issued cheques
of Rs. 13,00,000/-. The rest is to be paid in cash. It is further
alleged that all the cheques were dishonored.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20598 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.
9,00,000/- as rest amount he has paid in cash to the complainant.
He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial
custody since 22.01.2026.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal
antecedent of two cases. Learned counsel for the complainant is
present and he has got no objection if the petitioner pays the same
within a period of six months.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the condition that
the petitioner shall pay Rupees Nine lakhs within nine months
to the complainant. The above named petitioner is directed to be
enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten
thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class in
connection with District Katihar Complaint Case No. 78 of 2024.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…