Patna High Court
Sudheer Kumar Singh @ Sudheer SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court ordered that the petitioners be released on conditional pre‑arrest bail and the matter be referred to mediation before any coercive action.
Summary
Sudheer Kumar Singh and Jyoti Prakash applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case where the FIR alleges they assaulted an informant over a failed vehicle transaction, charging them under several sections of the BNS. The petitioners contend that the dispute is essentially civil, that no injury was caused, and that the criminal allegations are vague and fabricated. The State and the informant opposed the bail but agreed to a possible amicable settlement. The High Court, relying on Supreme Court precedents, held that where a civil remedy is available and parties are willing to mediate, the court should facilitate settlement before proceeding with criminal action. Accordingly, the court directed the district court to refer the matter to mediation, granted interim protection and conditional pre‑arrest bail, and disposed of the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations constitute a cognizable criminal offence warranting denial of pre‑arrest bail.
- Whether a civil dispute disguised as a criminal case warrants quashing or staying of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.
- Whether conditional pre‑arrest bail can be granted pending mediation.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 318(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- civil dispute
- mediation
- Section 482 CrPC
- abuse of process
- assault
- criminal vs civil
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9846 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2025 Thana- JAMHOR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Sudheer Kumar Singh @ Sudheer Singh S/o Surya Dev Singh R/o vill-
Ramchandra Nagar, Batwa, P.S.- Jamhore, Distt.- Aurangabad, Bihar
2. Jyoti Prakash @ Guddu S/o Sudheer Kumar Singh @ Sudheer Singh R/o
vill- Ramchandra Nagar, Batwa, P.S.- Jamhore, Distt.- Aurangabad, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bholanath Agarwal Son of late Mangat Ray Agarwal Resident of Mohalla
-128/231, h.Block, Kidwainagar, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Aman Vishal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Rahul Rathour, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 06-05-2026 Heard Mr. Aman Vishal, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi,
learned APP for the State, as well as, Mr. Rahul Rathour, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of Informant.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Jamhore P.S. Case No. 269/2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109,
318(4), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the BNS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9846 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
2/6
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant agreed to sell his dumper for Rs. 36,00,000/- to one
Achal Prakash, who, on the pretext of arranging finance, got the
N.O.C. transferred in his name but failed to pay the
consideration amount and when the informant went to demand
the money, the petitioners called him inside the house, abused
and assaulted him, and attempted to strangulate him with an
intention to kill.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
falsely been implicated in the present case. The primary
allegation relates to non-payment of consideration by co-
accused Achal Prakash in a vehicle transaction, which is
essentially civil in nature, and no specific overt act is attributed
to the present petitioners except general and omnibus allegations
of assault and intimidation. The informant has not sustained any
injury, and the allegations are vague and concocted. The
petitioners had no role in the transaction and have been
implicated only due to relationship with the co-accused and
business rivalry. The matter primarily relates to monetary
transaction between the parties and for amicable settlement of
dispute between the parties outside the Court, the matter be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9846 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
3/6
referred for mediation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the Informant and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State
submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable
settlement outside the court.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners have
agreed to appear before the learned District Court at 10:30 A.M.
on 14.05.2026.
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 F.I.R., 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9846 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
4/6
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 petitioners have willingly desired to appear
before the learned District Court on or before 14.05.2026, so
that the matter can be referred to the District Mediation Centre.
12. Learned District Court is directed to issue notice
to O.P. No.2 and 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”.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9846 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
5/6
within a period of three months, till then, no coercive action
shall be taken against the petitioners 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 petitioners are
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 petitioners to
appear on 14.05.2026 before the learned District Court or any
date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection
granted to the petitioners shall automatically lose its force.
16. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the
complainant to reconcile, then in that case, the interim
protection granted to the petitioners 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,
petitioners are 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9846 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
6/6
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)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…