Patna High Court
MD. NAUREZ ALAM @ MD. NOUREZ ALAMversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, directing enlargement on bail with conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Special Act, 2023.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Naurez Alam, was charged under Sections 115(2), 318(4), 316(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for allegedly receiving Rs. 4,50,000 from the complainant for a meat‑factory investment, paying only Rs. 15,000 as profit and issuing a cheque that later dishonoured. The petitioner claimed he never received the money from the complainant, that the cash was given to the complainant’s brother‑in‑law and returned, and that a blank cheque was misused. The State opposed bail, arguing the cheque dishonour indicated culpability. The court examined the submissions, noted the case essentially involved a cheque dishonour/loan default, and granted bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Special Act, 2023. The bail order also stipulated cancellation if criminal antecedents or false statements were discovered.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate bail disposition in a case involving alleged cheque dishonour and related offences under the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and the Negotiable Instruments Act?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 115(2), 316(2), 318(4)
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- bail
- cheque dishonour
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act
- Section 138
- criminal antecedents
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86403 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1817 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Naurez Alam @ Md. Nourez Alam Son Of Md. Shamsad Alam @ Md.
Shamsad Resident Of Village - Gogi Pothiya, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Simraha,
District - Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ujala Perween Wife of Tauqueer Alam R/o village - Gogi Pothiya, Ward
No.- 13, P.S.- Simraha, District - Araria
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Md. Naushaduzzoha, Advocate
For the State : Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest,
in connection with Complaint Case No. 1817 C of 2024, filed
for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 318(4) and
316(2) of B.N.S. and Section 138 of N.I. Act.
3. As per allegation, the complainant paid Rs.
4,50,000/- to the accused-petitioner for investing in meat factory
to get 50% of the profit earned by the petitioner. Thereafter, Rs.
15,000/- was received by the complainant from the petitioner
towards the profit and thereafter, nothing was being paid to her
and on demand, the petitioner issued one cheque of Rs.
4,50,000/-, but the same has got dishonored.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86403 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that no money has been received from
the complainant. Rs. 4,50,000/- was received from the brother-
in-law of the complainant i.e. Nayyar @ Nayyar Alam in cash,
however, the same has been returned to him in cash.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier
either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the
bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
7. However, learned APP for the State and learned
counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer of
the Petitioner for bail submitting that the complainant has given
Rs. 4,50,000/- to the petitioner in cash and hence, he has issued
one cheque in her favour, but the same has got dishonored.
8. By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that a blank cheque was given to the brother-in-law/
Nayyar @ Nayyar Alam of the complainant and that cheque is
being misused by the complainant.
9. In view of submissions of the parties, it appears that
basically there is case of dishonour of cheque or non-payment of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86403 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
the loan, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioner,
above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on
his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned concerned Court below, in connection
with 1817-C of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S 2023, and on the
following conditions:
(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, learned
court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after
hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has
concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the
same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong,
learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Jitendra Kumar, J)
shoaib/-
U T
Checking your session…