Patna High Court
Sanjeev Kumar Chaurasia @ Sanjeev KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail, finding the complaint prima facie weak and non‑compliant with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjeev Kumar Chaurasia, was implicated in a complaint (No. 2443 of 2022) alleging cheating through a dishonoured cheque of Rs.55,000 and offences under several IPC sections. He contended that the cheque was never presented to the bank and that no bank memo existed, arguing that the complaint was filed to harass him and that the prosecution failed to comply with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant opposed bail, asserting that the petitioner cheated him in a paddy purchase. The court observed that the complaint lacked a bank memo, was not filed under Section 138 of the NIA, and showed no prima facie compliance with Section 142, rendering the case weak. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in the pending criminal complaint.
- Whether the complaint is maintainable given the alleged non‑compliance with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
- Whether there is a prima facie case under the alleged IPC offences.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 420, 504
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138, 142
Subjects
- bail
- cheque bounce
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- Section 142
- Section 138
- cheating
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure
- harassment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21472 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2443 Year-2022 Thana- PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Purnia
======================================================
Sanjeev Kumar Chaurasia @ Sanjeev Kumar son of Ajay Kumar Chaurasia
R/o Village- Naya tola Gangaili Ward No-9, Ps- K. Nagar (Maranga) Dist-
Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar.
2. Vijay Kumar Mehta son of Late Dinesh Pd. Mehta R/o Village- Naya Tola
Gangaili ward No-10, Ps- K. nagar (Maranga) Top Dist- Purnea.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 28-01-2026 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
complainant.
2. The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 2443 of 2022 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 420, 504/34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint, petitioner alleged to cheat
complainant as cheque drawn by petitioner for sum of Rs.
55,000/- drawn at Bandhan Bank dated 26.10.2021 upon
presentation was not honoured as signature of petitioner was not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21472 of 2024(3) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
available at proper place.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that the entire allegation raised in the
background of dishonouring of cheque, which was returned to the
complainant as signature of petitioner was not drawn at specified
place of the cheque. It is submitted that in fact the cheque was
never presented before the bank because no bank memo qua
presentation of cheque is available on record. It is submitted that
just to harass the petitioner, the present criminal complaint case
was lodged. Learned counsel further submitted that entire
complaint prosecution initiated without compliance of Section 142
of N.I. Act.
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.
6. Learned counsel Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, appearing
on behalf of the complainant/opposite party no. 2, while opposing
the prayer of bail submitted that the petitioner cheated for a sum
of Rs. 55,000/- against purchase of paddy from the complainant.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as the narration of the complaint prima facie
suggest that same was lodged in the background of dishonouring
of cheque which not appears even supported by bank memo,
coupled with the fact that even the complaint not appears to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21472 of 2024(3) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
filed for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act
without any prima facie compliance of Section 142 of the N.I. Act,
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 Sessions
Judge, Purnea/concerned Court, where the case is pending in
connection with Complaint Case No. 2443 of 2022 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…