Patna High Court
Anil Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court granted pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the condition that he produce evidence of payment of statutory dues and a No‑Dues certificate within eight weeks.
Summary
Anil Kumar Singh, a director of Horizon Infab Private Limited, sought pre‑arrest bail in a complaint alleging criminal breach of trust, cheating, and conspiracy under IPC sections 406, 420 and 34, relating to the alleged fraudulent transfer of shares and misappropriation of company assets. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and other directors induced an elderly shareholder to transfer his shares on false promises, resulting in loss of assets worth crores. Both parties, who are directors, claimed the dispute stemmed from substantial GST and Income‑Tax liabilities of the company and expressed willingness to settle the dues within two weeks. The High Court, noting the pending settlement, the withdrawal of NCLT proceedings, and the principle of joint director responsibility for statutory dues, ordered the district court to grant the petitioner pre‑arrest bail conditioned on furnishing payment challans, receipts and a No‑Dues certificate within eight weeks. The court also directed the Registrar of Companies to provide the current asset‑liability and shareholding details to clarify each director’s liability, and restrained any coercive action against the petitioner pending compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite allegations under IPC sections 406, 420 and 34.
- Whether the directors can be held jointly responsible for the company's statutory tax liabilities in the context of bail.
- What conditions, if any, may be imposed on the grant of pre‑arrest bail in such corporate dispute cases.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- criminal breach of trust
- cheating
- conspiracy
- director liability
- statutory dues
- GST
- Income Tax
- company law
- settlement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49976 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4973 Year-2023 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Anil Kumar Singh S/O Late Gauri Lal Singh Resident of Power House Road,
Jharsugada, P.S- Jharsugada, Distt-Jharsugada,Odisha
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Arjun Prasad Singh S/O Late Sukhdev Prasad Singh R/O House No. D/4,
Ashiana Nagar,Phase 2,PS-Rajiv Nagar, Distt-Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P. N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Madhukar Anand, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Adya Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 28-04-2026 Heard Mr. Mr. P. N. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel
along with Mr. Madhukar Anand and Mr. Shubham Kumar
Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner;
Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned APP for the State and Mr. Sanjeev
Kumar Mishra, Senior Counsel along with Ms. Adya Pandey,
learned counsel for the informant/O.P. No.2.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with complaint Case No. 4973(C) of 2023 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49976 of 2025(6) dt.28-04-2026
2/4
complainant, Arjun Prasad Singh, along with co-shareholders
Kiran Singh, Anil Kumar Singh (petitioner) and Pushpa Singh,
each having 25% share in M/s Horizon Infab Private Limited,
alleged that the accused persons, taking advantage of his
advanced age, dishonestly induced him to transfer his shares on
the promise of payment and discharge of liabilities, but failed to
honour the same. It is further alleged that the accused persons
thereby usurped company assets worth crores and started
disposing of the machinery for wrongful gain.
4. At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner and Opposite Party No. 2, both being Directors
of the Company in question, jointly submit that disputes have
arisen inter se between them on account of substantial tax
liabilities of the Company, including dues payable towards
Goods and Services Tax (GST), as well as, Income Tax. It is
submitted that owing to non-payment of such liabilities,
allegations have been levelled against each other.
5. It is further submitted that the parties have agreed
to arrive at a mutual settlement within a period of two weeks
and shall thereafter appear before the concerned authorities to
ascertain the exact liabilities of the Company towards State
GST, Central GST, and Income Tax, based on assessment orders
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49976 of 2025(6) dt.28-04-2026
3/4
and returns filed. It has also been submitted that the outstanding
dues shall be cleared forthwith in accordance with the
determination made by the respective departments, subject to
the outcome of any pending appeals.
6. Considering the nature of allegations, the fact that
the petitioner is one of the Directors of the Company, and that
proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal,
Kolkata, have been withdrawn, paving the way for settlement
between the parties for payment of outstanding statutory dues,
the learned District Court is directed to release the petitioner on
pre-arrest bail on such terms and conditions, as the learned
District Court deems fit and proper, in the event the
petitioner furnishes, at the time of submission of bail bonds, the
challans/receipts evidencing payment of dues and a ‘No Dues
Certificate’ issued by the competent authorities of the GST
Department and the Income Tax Department.
7. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed
within a period of eight weeks from the date of this order.
8. Learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 has
raised an objection submitting that he is liable only to the extent
of his shareholding, as determined under the Memorandum of
Association, Articles of Association, and resolutions of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49976 of 2025(6) dt.28-04-2026
4/4
Board of Directors, as duly intimated to the Registrar of
Companies.
9. In this regard, the Registrar of Companies is
directed to furnish the present status of the assets and liabilities
of the Company, along with the shareholding pattern of the
petitioner, Opposite Party No. 2, and other Directors, so as to
remove any ambiguity regarding their respective liabilities.
10. However, this Court observes that the Company,
being a separate legal entity, the Directors cannot evade
responsibility in respect of statutory dues, and prima facie, joint
responsibility arises in ensuring compliance. In the event of
default by any of the Directors, the Superintendent of Police
concerned shall take immediate steps to take the petitioner,
Opposite Party No. 2, and other concerned Directors into
custody.
11. Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken
against the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case.
12. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…