Patna High Court
Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted in the present case, subject to strict conditions, despite the pending allegations under the IPC.
Summary
Mukesh Kumar sought anticipatory bail after a complaint was lodged alleging that he, in collusion with others, cheated a complainant by promising railway employment and obtaining Rs. 7,43,000 by bank transfer and Rs. 20,000 in cash. The petitioner denied any wrongdoing, asserted clean antecedents, and offered to repay Rs. 2,94,000 in installments. The State opposed the bail application. The High Court, noting the general nature of the accusations, the petitioner’s clean record and his undertaking to deposit the amount, granted anticipatory bail with a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, imposing conditions including a cash deposit of Rs. 1,00,000 and staged payments of the remaining amount. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, without addressing the merits of the case. The bail is to remain in force for eight weeks from the date of the order, subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a complaint case involving alleged offences under Sections 406, 420 and 504 IPC.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedents and willingness to deposit the alleged amount justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the CrPC are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal breach of trust
- cheating
- IPC
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- Bihar High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65907 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2021 Thana- MUNGER COMPLAINT CASE
District- Munger
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar S/o Lakhan Paswan R/o Village - Kamruddinpur Chowk, P.S
- Muffasil (Singhaul), District - Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pradip Kumar S/o Nand Kishore Paswan R/o Mohalla - Shadipur, PWD
Quarter, Shah Jubair Road, Ambe Chowk, P.S - Kotwali, District - Munger
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Verma, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Suman Kumari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406,
420 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per complaint petition, it is alleged that this
petitioner, in collusion with other accused persons, by fraudulent
misinterpretation, induced the complainant to part with huge
amount of money on the false pretext of providing employment
in the Railways. It is alleged that Rs. 7,43,000/- was credited in
the account of the accused persons by the complainant and Rs.
20,000/- was paid in cash.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65907 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. From bare perusal of the complaint
petition it is apparent that the complainant parted with money
for an illegal purpose and he cannot be allowed to urge that he
has been cheated. No such occurrence, as alleged in the
complaint petition, ever took place. However, it is submitted
that at this stage, without admitting his guilt, petitioner is ready
to deposit the amount allegedly transferred in the account of this
petitioner, amounting to Rs. 2,94,000/- (Rupees two lakh ninety-
four thousand), in easy installments. Petitioner claims clean
antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing on
behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, clean
antecedents and aforesaid undertaking of the petitioner, prayer
for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65907 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,
Munger in connection with Complaint Case No. 149C of 2021,
subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S., along with the following terms and conditions:
“A. At the time of furnishing bail-bond Rs.
1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) shall be
deposited through cash in the Nazarat of the
Civil Court, Munger.
B. Rest amount i.e. Rs. 1,94,000/- (Rupees one
lakh ninety-four thousand) shall be deposited
in the Nazarat of Civil Court, Munger in two
equal installments within a period of six
months from the date of furnishing bail-
bond.
C. The aforesaid payment shall be subject to the
final outcome of the case.
D. If petitioner fails to comply the aforesaid
direction of this Court, the learned Trial Court
is free to cancel the bail-bond of the
petitioner.”
8. It is made clear that without going into the merit
of the case, the aforesaid order has been passed only for the
purpose of grant of bail.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…