Patna High Court
Amarnath KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and specific conditions including payment of Rs.10 lakh to the informant.
Summary
Amarnath Kumar, accused of offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 336, 504 and 506 of the IPC, has been in custody since 11 September 2025. The prosecution alleges that he, as a partner of Mahadeo Enterprises, misused a blank cheque, obtained a loan of Rs.15 lakh, and misappropriated profits amounting to Rs.32.32 lakh, while threatening the informant. The petitioner contends that the allegations are false, he has a clean antecedent, and the case is a civil dispute disguised as a criminal matter; he also points to a prior anticipatory bail order that was later dismissed. He offered to pay Rs.10 lakh to the informant and sought the defreezing of the firm’s bank account. The court, after considering the submissions and the informant’s willingness to cooperate, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including payment of Rs.10 lakh within three months and compliance with trial procedures.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate bail disposition for an accused facing multiple serious IPC offences when the accused claims a clean antecedent and offers monetary compensation?
- Whether the petitioner’s willingness to pay compensation and the informant’s readiness to defreeze the bank account justify granting bail?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 336, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- partnership dispute
- cheating
- IPC offences
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- surety
- defreezing bank account
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85727 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2024 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Amarnath Kumar S/O Late Vishwanath Sahni Resident of village- Sahwajpur,
P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Gyan Prakash, Advocate
: Ms. Parul Priya, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 31-01-2026 Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Abhay Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State as well as Mr. Gyan Prakash, learned
counsel for the Informant.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
11.09.2025 in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No.162 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 03.02.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 336, 504, 506 of Indian Penal
Code.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant and
the petitioner were partners in Mahadeo Enterprises since
20.09.2022 and the said partnership firm has one dealership
shop of E-Rickshaw at Old O Mile Chauk, Ahiyapur,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85727 of 2025(6) dt.31-01-2026
2/7
muzaffarpur. It is further alleged that the petitioner took
signature of the informant on some blank cheque and also took
password of SBI Bank and thereafter misused and cheater her
and took loan of Rs.15 Lakhs from a private financer MINTIFI
FINSERVE Pvt. Ltd. and dishonestly misappropriated the
profits of the firm amounting to Rs.32,32,462/-. When the
informant asked for details of income and expenditure, he
threatened her and pushed her away from the shop.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the
F.I.R.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
earlier the petitioner was granted the privilege of anticipatory
bail vide order dated 20.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 42545 of 2024
and thereafter the petitioner filed a modification petition vide
order dated 20.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 71503 of 2024 but the
same was dismissed vide order dated 18.10.2024 and then the
then the petitioner has challenged both the orders before the
Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (Criminal) Diary No-58585 of 2024
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85727 of 2025(6) dt.31-01-2026
3/7
but the same was dismissed vide order dated 31.01.2025.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
story of the prosecution is false and fabricated and infact the
petitioner had entered in a partnership deed with informant for
running the business of e-rickshaw and auto mobile in the name
and style of Mahadeo Enterprises and both the persons got share
of 50% in profit and loss and the accounting of the profit with
terms and condition that loss will be settled by both the parties
and for running the business they will have to take loan with
joint consent and the accounting of the business will be made on
each month and the insurance of the firm will be made in
insurance company and the premium of the insurance will be
paid from the capital of the firm and a joint account will be open
in Bank but the firm account will be operated by the 1 st party
(the petitioner).
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner did not breach any terms and conditions of the
partnership sale deed but the informant has filed the false case
only to harass the petitioner. He further submits that when
business of E-rickshaw was going on, thereafter a current
account was opened bearing Account No-00000041373845722
in the name of Mahadeo Enterprises and thereafter the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85727 of 2025(6) dt.31-01-2026
4/7
informant, who is partner of the Mahadeo Enterprises has filed a
petition to the Manager, State Bank of India, S.K. Medical
Hospital, Campur, Muzaffarpur to freeze the current bank
account of Mahadeo Enterprises on 06.11.2023.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on
the basis of the petition filed on behalf of the Informant, the
bank account of Mahadeo Enterprises was freezed and the
business of the petitioner was hampered and thereafter the
informant has lodged the present case against the petitioner and
the entire liability was the civil liability and the informant has
filed the present criminal case against the petitioner only to
harass the petitioner and police after investigation has submitted
charge-sheet. The petitioner is in custody since 11.09.2025.
9. A 3rd supplementary affidavit has been filed on
behalf of petitioner, wherein the following statement has been
made in Paragraph No.6:-
“6. That when the petitioner is ready to
comply the direction of the Hon'ble High
Court's order the Annexure- P/1 of the
petition in installment after releasing from
judicial custody and the informant who also
be directed to file petition for defreezing of
the Bank Account and to make settlement in
this case and in Complaint Case No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85727 of 2025(6) dt.31-01-2026
5/7
666/2024 the Annexure-P/7 and P/8 of the
petition and to relinquish her partnership
right the Annexure-P/5 of the petition.”
10. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well
as learned counsel for the Informant have vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that informant
has filed reply to the 3rd supplementary affidavit, wherein the
following statements have been made in Paragraph Nos.3 and
4:-
3. That with regard the statement made in
paragraph no. 6 of 3rd Supplementary
Affidavit of the petitioner, it is submitted that
the informant is ready to defreeze the bank
A/C No. 00000413738455722 in which Rs.
219,000/- is laying as balance in which
informant being partner of 50% is entitled
to 50% of the amount. She is also ready to
relinquish her partnership right.
4. That with regard to the statement made
in paragraph no.7 of the 3rd Supplementary
Affidavit it is submitted that petitioner
himself undertaken to pay Rs 10 Lakh on
20.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 42545 of 2024
in this Hon'ble Court and he has also
issued two cheques of Rs. 3,00,000/- each
on 04.01.2025 and 20.01.2025 respectively
while his SLP was pending before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court and both the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85727 of 2025(6) dt.31-01-2026
6/7
cheques have been dishounered on
presentation in Bank (Annexure- 4 Series).
In all fairness he ought to have come with
clean hand before this Hon'ble Court and
informant being partner and maternal
aunty is every time ready to co-operate him.
11. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that petitioner has clean antecedent and he is ready
to comply the order dated 20.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
42545 of 2024 which suggest that the petitioner is ready to pay
Rs.10 Lakh to the informant whiout being prejudiced to his case
in the trial court and the informant is ready to defreez the bank
Account No-00000041373845722, let the petitioner, above
named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Muzaffarpur in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No.162 of
2024, subject to the following conditions:-
i. The petitioner shall deposit Rs. 10 Lakh to the
informant within a period of three months and if the petitioner
fails to deposit Rs.10 Lakh to the informant within the aforesaid
period, the informant shall be at liberty to move before the
appropriate forum for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner.
ii. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85727 of 2025(6) dt.31-01-2026
7/7
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
iii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iv. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…