Pankaj Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1156 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31826 of 2020
   Arising Out of PS Case No.-782 Year-2019 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia
======================================================

Pankaj Kumar Mishra, aged about 37 years, Male, Son of Late Dinbandhu Mishra, Resident of Village - Sheranchak, PS- Ballia, District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s    :        Ms. Soni Srivastava, Advocate
For the State           :        Mr. Dashrath Mehta, APP
For the Informant       :        Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 26-02-2021

Heard Ms. Soni Srivastava, learned counsel for the

petitioner; Mr. Dashrath Mehta, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State and

Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Khajanchi Hat PS Case No. 782 of 2019 dated 21.10.2019,

instituted under Sections 406, 420 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had got

into some business relationship with the informant in which the

informant had invested good amount of money and lastly he also

had taken loan from the saving bank account of his wife of Rs. 3 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31826 of 2020 dt.26-02-2021

lakhs and it was with the understanding that the petitioner would

repay the installment but when the same was not paid, there was

mediation in the family and thereafter the petitioner is said to have

paid his installment of Rs. 11,000/- for a few months after which it

is alleged that the same was also stopped and further that efforts

for reconciling the account was also not hided by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

from the plain reading of the FIR itself, it is apparent that the

entire allegation is of purely civil nature, inasmuch as, the dispute

is one and only i.e., monetary. It was submitted that though there

is no material, much less, admissible in law even to indicate that

any amount was given to the petitioner, but even for the sake of

argument, if it is accepted that money was taken by the petitioner

from the informant, then also, the only forum for recovery is by

filing money suit as also for compensation of damages as the

informant may deem appropriate. It was submitted that such

things require evidence to be adduced and once there is nothing on

record and in fact in the FIR itself, no such evidence has been

even referred to, all the more reason that it requires a thorough

trial where parties will be at liberty to adduce evidence in the face

of there being no existing admissible evidence available on record.

Learned counsel submitted that both the parties are in business of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31826 of 2020 dt.26-02-2021

motor parts and there is also business rivalry and this may be a

cause for some heart burning. It was further submitted that the

petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner is alleged

to have taken away Rs. 3 lakhs but failed to return.

6. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the

actual amount taken by the petitioner, all through bank

transactions, is Rs. 3 lakhs but the total is Rs. 8.50 lakhs and the

petitioner was given ample opportunity for reconciling the

account/matter and returning the due of the informant, but he not

only chose not to return the money but had also threatened with

dire consequences.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the

event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six

weeks from today, the petitioner be released on bail upon

furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in Khajanchi Hat PS

Case No. 782 of 2019, subject to the conditions laid down in

Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and

further, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31826 of 2020 dt.26-02-2021

petitioner and (ii) that the petitioner shall co-operate with the

police/prosecution and the Court. Failure to co-operate shall lead

to cancellation of his bail bonds.

8. The application stands disposed off in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T