AWADH BIHARI UPADHAYAY @ ABADH BIHARI UPADHAYAYversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30146 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-504 Year-2018 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE
                                                     District- Munger
                 ======================================================
              Awadh Bihari Upadhayay @ Abadh Bihari Upadhayay S/O Late
              Shyamnarayan Upadhyay @ Late Narayan Upadhyay R/O Vill -
              Sabbalpur Khurd, Post- Sabbalpur Kala, P.S.- Jamania, Distt.- Gazipur
              (U.P)
                                                                   ... ... Petitioner
                                            Versus
           1. The State of Bihar
           2.    Amit Kumar Jha S/o Shri Manoj Jha R/o vill - Kuangadi, Supaur
                 Jamua, P.S.- Sangrampur, Distt.- Munger
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :       Mr.Vijay Bardhan Pandey, Advocate
                 For the State          :       Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP
                 For the O.P. No.2      :       Mr.Bishwajeet Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   21-01-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State duly assisted by learned counsel for the

                   complainant/O.P. No.2.

                             2. The accused-petitioner, named in the complaint

                   petition, apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint

                   Case No. 504C of 2018 registered for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

                             3. As per complaint, petitioner introduced the co-

                   accused namely, Mani Bhushan Pandey, who cheated the

                   complainant/O.P. No.2 for a sum of Rs. Twenty (20) Lakhs on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30146 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
                                            2/4




          pretext of providing a job in Indian Army.

                   4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner submitted that the thrust of allegation, as per

          complaint and as per agreement dated 07.09.2016, appears

          available against co-accused Mani Bhushan Pandey. It is

          submitted that as this petitioner introduced co-accused Mani

          Bhushan Pandey to the complainant/O.P. No.2, was

          implicated in this case.

                   5. It is submitted that even petitioner was not the

          party of agreement for returning Rs. Twenty (20) Lakhs.

          Arguing further, it is submitted that present agreement in

          issue was executed in the year 2016, but after a gap of two

          years, notice was issued in May 2018, just to create the cause

          of action, and, thereafter on 04.06.2018, after passing more

          than two years, the present complaint was filed as an

          afterthought. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.

                   6. Learned A.P.P. for the State duly assisted by Mr.

          Bishwajeet Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the

          informant, while opposing the prayer for anticipatory bail of

          the petitioner, submitted that this petitioner was involved in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30146 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
                                            3/4




          entire deal as he not only introduced the petitioner with the

          complainant/O.P. No.2, rather the stamp paper was also

          brought in his name, which suggests prima facie his complicity

          with the present crime in question. Learned counsel further

          submitted that petitioner and co-accused had assured to

          return the aforesaid amount within one and half year.

                   7. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking note of the fact as primarily the dispute is with regard

          to recovery of Rs. Twenty (20) Lakhs as paid to the co-

          accused Mani Bhushan Pandey, which may redressed by way

          of civil proceeding, coupled with the fact that thrust of

          allegation is not available against this petitioner, accordingly,

          above-named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender

          within a period of four weeks from this order, is directed to be

          enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.10,000/-

          (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each

          to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial

          Magistrate-II, Munger/concerned court in connection with

          Complaint Case No. 504C of 2018, subject to the conditions

          as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30146 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
                                                       4/4




                     482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short

                     “B.N.S.S.”).


                                                                   (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-

U      T