Patna High Court
Upendra paswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender and apply for regular bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Upendra Paswan, was charged under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly taking Rs 25,000 on a promise to secure admission for the complainant’s son in an engineering college, after which the admission did not materialise and the son’s certificates were allegedly retained. The petitioner contended that the son had actually secured admission in 2015, left the course, and that the original certificates were with the college, rendering the complaint false. He applied for anticipatory bail. The Sessions Judge rejected the bail application, relying on Supreme Court precedents (Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI) that emphasise the need for strict scrutiny when the maximum punishment is seven years. The Patna High Court upheld the lower court’s approach, disposing of the anticipatory bail application but allowing the petitioner to surrender within three weeks and seek regular bail before the magistrate, applying the same Supreme Court guidelines and its own recent decisions. The order therefore denied anticipatory bail while providing a procedural avenue for regular bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a person accused of cheating under IPC Section 420 where the maximum punishment is seven years.
- Whether the Supreme Court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI are applicable to deny anticipatory bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cheating
- IPC 420
- bail jurisprudence
- Supreme Court guidelines
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75959 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1384 Year-2016 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
District- East Champaran
======================================================
Upendra paswan, son of Ramshish Paswan, R/o Village-Dhekhaha Bazar,
Dhekhan Goswami Tola Motihari, P.S-Pipra Khoti, District-East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ramadhar Ram S/o Shri Pujai Ram R/o vill - Machhahan, P.S.- Motihari
Muffasil, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Baidhyanath Thakur
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-04-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out
of Complaint Case No. C-1384 of 2016 (Trial No. 1548
of 2025), in which cognizance has been taken for the
offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The prosecution case, as per the complaint petition, is that
the petitioner, on the promise of getting admission of the
complainant’s son in an engineering college, at
Chandigarh, took a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, but the
complainant’s son could not get admission in engineering
college and his education certificates has also been kept
by the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75959 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He
further submits that the complainant’s son took admission
in the B. Tech. (Computer Science) in the year 2015, in
Adesh Institute of Technology, Mohali, Chandigarh,
having Roll No. 1545857, but he left his studies. This
would be evident from Annexure-2, which is the
certificate given by the College, dated 06.08.2025. He
further submits that the original educational certificates
and other testimonials are with the College and the son of
the complainant can take the certificates from the college
itself.
5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned
and have gone through the impugned order.
6. The learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran, at Motihari,
has disposed the anticipatory bail application of the
petitioner on the basis of law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court, in the cases of Arnesh Kumar v. The
State of Bihar, reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 and
Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI and Another, reported in
(2022) 10 SCC 51, inasmuch as according to the learned
Sessions Judge, East Champaran, at Motihari, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75959 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
maximum punishment for the offence alleged against the
petitioner is seven years.
7. Considering the aforesaid, this application is disposed
with liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the
concerned Magistrate within a period of three weeks from
today and seek regular bail. If the petitioner surrenders,
the learned Magistrate will consider his bail application
on the date of filing itself on the basis of law laid down
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the cases of Satendra
Kumar Antil (supra) and Arnesh Kumar (supra) as well
as the decision of this Court, in the cases of Naushad
Ansari v. The State of Bihar (Criminal Misc. No. 3536
of 2024) and Asha Baitha v. The State of Bihar
(Criminal Misc. No. 44659 of 2024).
8. This anticipatory bail application is disposed accordingly.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)
Prabhakar Anand/-
U √ T √
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.