Patna High Court
Md. Shahid AkhtarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The High Court ordered the petitioner’s release on pre‑arrest bail, subject to mediation, and directed the district court to refer the dispute to the District Mediation Centre.
Summary
The petitioner, Md Shahid Akhtar, was implicated in a criminal complaint (CA No.463 of 2022) alleging cheating of Rs 30.11 lakh and alleged violations of Sections 120B, 420 and 468 of the IPC. He applied for pre‑arrest bail, claiming innocence and seeking an amicable settlement through mediation. The State and the informant’s counsel also expressed willingness to explore mediation. The High Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s observations in Paramjeet Batra v. State of Uttarakhand and S.N. Vijayalakshmi v. State of Karnataka, directed that the matter be referred to the District Mediation Centre and that the petitioner be released on pre‑arrest bail subject to the mediator’s efforts and the district court’s conditions. The Court stipulated that the bail protection would lapse if the petitioner failed to appear for mediation, and that a mutual settlement would require withdrawal of the criminal case. The application for bail was therefore disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted in a criminal case involving alleged cheating pending mediation.
- Whether the High Court may direct referral to a mediation centre under its inherent powers and Section 482 of the CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 420, 468
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- mediation
- criminal procedure
- cheating
- Section 482 CrPC
- civil dispute settlement
- IPC 120B
- IPC 420
- IPC 468
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69047 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-463 Year-2022 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Katihar
======================================================
Md. Shahid Akhtar S/O Late Amantullah R/O - Hasanganj, P.S.- Hasanganj,
Distt.- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ram Vilas Vishwakarma S/O Late Harivansh Vishwakarma R/O Durgapur
(Binodpur),P.S.- Nagar, Dist.- Katihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the complainant : Ms.Durga Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 20-02-2026 Heard Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Ms.Durga Kumari, learned
counsel for the complainant and Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with CA Case No.463 of 2022, registered under Sections 120B,
420 and 468 of IPC.
3. As per the allegations made in the complaint
petition, the petitioner cheated a total sum of Rs.30,11,000/-
from the complainant and failed to execute the sale deed in
favour of the complainant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69047 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
2/5
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has
falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submitted
that the matter primarily relates to monetary transaction between
the parties and for amicable settlement of dispute between the
parties outside the Court, the matter can be referred for
mediation.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel for the informant submitted that a chance may
be given for amicable settlement of the dispute outside the
court.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties,
on instructions, submitted that the parties have agreed to appear
before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M. on 17.03.2026.
7. Heard the parties.
8. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the FIR, I am of the opinion that an opportunity is
required to be given to the parties to settle their score amicably
outside the Court.
9. In this regard, I find it apt to take note of the
observation made by the Apex Court in case of Paramjeet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69047 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
3/5
Batra v. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2013) 11 SCC 673,
in which, the Apex Court in paragraph no. 12 has held as
follows:
"12. While exercising its jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Code the High Court has
to be cautious. This power is to be used sparingly
and only for the purpose of preventing abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure ends of
justice. Whether a complaint discloses a criminal
offence or not depends upon the nature of facts
alleged therein. Whether essential ingredients of
criminal offence are present or not has to be
judged by the High Court. A complaint disclosing
civil transactions may also have a criminal texture.
But the High Court must see whether a dispute
which is essentially of a civil nature is given a
cloak of criminal offence. In such a situation, if a
civil remedy is available and is, in fact, adopted as
has happened in this case, the High Court should
not hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings to
prevent abuse of process of the court."
(emphasis supplied)
10. The Apex Court has reiterated the aforesaid
proposition in recent judgment of S. N. Vijayalakshmi & Ors.
vrs. The State of Karnataka and Anr. reported in (2025) SCC
Online SC 1575.
11. The parties have willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on 17.03.2026, so that the
matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
12. Learned District Court is directed to take
necessary steps to refer the matter before the learned Mediator
of the District Mediation Center by fixing a date for appearance
of the parties to give effect to “Mediation for the Nation 2.0”.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69047 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
4/5
13. Learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center
concerned, upon appearance of the parties, shall make his/her
best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and thereafter submit
his/her report before the concerned learned District Court, well
within a period of three months, till then, no coercive action
shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with the
aforesaid case.
14. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably
or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by
the Apex Court as referred hereinabove, the petitioner is
required to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
15. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner to
appear on 17.03.2026 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall automatically lose its force.
16. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
informant to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection
granted to the petitioner shall continue and the trial shall
proceed in accordance with law.
17. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that
case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69047 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
5/5
is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and
conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
18. If both the parties arrive at amicable settlement,
then they must withdraw the criminal cases, if any, which they
have lodged against each other.
19. With aforesaid direction and observation, the
present application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.