Patna High Court
Abhishek Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The Patna High Court considered a bail application filed by Abhishek Kumar Singh, who was in custody for alleged offences under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The FIR alleged that the petitioner received a friendly loan of Rs 20 lakh from the complainant and failed to repay it, issuing two cheques that were later dishonoured due to a signature mismatch. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent, asserted that the allegations were fabricated, and said the cheques were issued for business or marriage purposes. The complainant countered that no business relationship existed, that the petitioner had not made any payment, and was willing to accept instalments, but the petitioner refused to pay. After hearing both sides, the Court found the allegations prima facie established and concluded that the petitioner was not a suitable candidate for bail, thereby refusing the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail pending trial for alleged offences under Sec 406 IPC and Sec 138 NI Act
- Whether the facts alleged constitute criminal breach of trust under Sec 406 of the IPC
- Whether the dishonour of the cheques attracts liability under Sec 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- bail
- criminal breach of trust
- cheque bounce
- Section 406 IPC
- Section 138 NI Act
- friendly loan
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3666 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-985 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Abhishek Kumar Singh Son of Dipnarayan Singh Resident of Postal Park,
Road No. 5 A, Indra Nagar, Ram Vilas Chowk, Near Shiv Parvati Community
Hall, Post- G.P.O., P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna, Bihar, Permanent
Address- Village and Post- Chanda Kevatia, P.S.- Bihiya, District- Bhojpur,
Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kumari Puja D/O- Bhanu Pratap Singh Resident of opposite JKMT Inter
High School, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Ward No. 21, Khagaria, P.O. and P.S.-
Khagaria, District- Khagaria, Current Address Purani Bus Stand, Mithapur,
P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna, Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pranoy Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 07-05-2026 Heard Mr.Pranoy Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the Mr.Shailendra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody
since 19.08.2025 in connection with Complaint Case No.
985(C) 2023, cognizance has been taken for the offences
under Section 406 of IPC & 138 N.I. Act.
3. As per FIR, complainant has given more than
Rs. 20,00,000/- (Twenty Lakh) rupees as a friendly loan to
the petitioner and his brother for the purpose of their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3666 of 2026(6) dt.07-05-2026
2/4
business and marriage of their sister on different dates. An
agreement was also executed between them but despite
several requests petitioner is not returning the money to the
complainant. Petitioner has used the money of the
complainant for his own business.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The
allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and
the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in
the FIR. It appears from the FIR/Complaint petition that the
petitioner has given undertaking to the complainant,
pursuant to the agreement dated 25.09.2021.
5. Learned counsel for the informant/complainant
submits that despite of that the petitioner has not given a
single penny of a coin to the complainant and he has issued
two cheques in favour of the complainant i.e. Cheque Nos.
590533 dated 21.11.2022 and 590541 dated 28.02.2022
respectively to a tune of Rs. 20,00,00/- (Twenty Lakhs) and
Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lakhs) respectively but the same were
dishonoured by the bank concerned due to mismatch the
signature of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3666 of 2026(6) dt.07-05-2026
3/4
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in turn,
submits that due to some business term the petitioner has
given the cheque in question to the complainant and
complainant has misused the same.
7. Learned counsel for the informant/complainant
has filed a counter affidavit stating therein that he has never
any business term with the petitioner.
8. In turn, learned counsel for the petitioner has
filed the reply to the counter affidavit stating therein that
due to marriage purpose, the petitioner has given the cheque
in question to the complainant which suggests that the
petitioner has changed his story by way of reply to the
counter affidavit.
9. Learned counsel for the informant/complainant
further submits that even the complainant is ready to
receive the amount by installment from the petitioner but
the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction,
submits that the petitioner is not ready to pay a single penny
of a coin.
10. In view of the aforesaid, this Court has no
other option except to reject the bail application of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3666 of 2026(6) dt.07-05-2026
4/4
petitioner, accordingly, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in connection with Complaint Case No.
985(C) 2023, pending in the court of learned ACJM-XI,
Patna.
11. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…