IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION)

(First Anticipatory Bail Application)

CR. MISC. No.- ……………. Of 2024

MOHAN PRASAD

…Petitioner

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

…Opposite Parties

Sub.- ANTICIPATORY BAIL

INDEX

S. No. Particulars Page no.

1. Anticipatory Bail application under section

482 of the BNSS with the affidavit.

2. Annexure P1
A certified copy of the Complaint Case
No.- 50/2018 dated 23.01.2018 and the
Order of Cognizance dated 07.12.2018.
Impugned Order

Vakalatnama
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION)

(First Anticipatory Bail Application)

CR. MISC. No.- ……………. Of 2024

In the matter of an application under

section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita.

And

In the matter of:

Mohan Prasad (Male), aged about 57 years son of Chandru Mahto,

Resident of Village- Piparwar, P.O.- Maigra, P.S.- Dumariya,

District- Gaya (Bihar), Pin code- 824206.

…..Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Kulendra Singh (Male), aged about 60 years son of Late

Rameshwar Prasad Resident of Vill.- Shankarpur, P.S.- Lutua

Presently residing at Mohalla- Imamganj, P.S.- Imamganj,

District- Gaya.

….Opposite Parties
To,

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Vinod Chandran the Chief Justice of High

Court of Judicature at Patna and his companion Justices of the said Hon’ble

Court.

The humble petition on behalf of the

petitioner above named.

Most Respectfully Sheweth:-

1. That this application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner above

named, seeking anticipatory bail, who apprehend his arrest by the

police in connection with Complaint case no. 50/2018 dated

23.01.2018 in which cognizance was taken for the offences

punishable Under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. That the petitioner has not moved earlier either regular bail or

anticipatory bail before this Hon’ble Court and the Hon’ble Supreme

Court regarding this matter. No any bail application is pending either

before this Hon’ble Court or learned Court below or the Hon’ble

Apex Court.

3. That the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

4. That the factual matrixes which led to the complaint have been

enumerated in brief as here under: -

i. The petitioner came to the shop of the complainant and asked

him to provide for stock of cement and iron rod for his new

business and told the complainant that he would pay him the

money once the stock will be sold.

ii. That on 17.07.2016, an agreement was prepared on a stamp of

Rs. 1000/- for business of cement and iron rod upon which the

complainant has supplied the cement and iron rod worth Rs.

3,82,000/- with a condition that the petitoner will return the

amount within 6 months and if any amount remains due, that

will be paid with the interest at the rate of the bank rate of

interest.

iii. Furthermore, on the lapse of 6 months the complainant

demanded his money then the petitioner said that he will return

it after some time.

iv. It is further alleged that on 15.11.2018, the accused persons

came at the shop of the complainant and threatened to not

demand for the money otherwise to face dire consequences.

On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the Ld. Court of Sri

Gautam Kumar, JM 1st Class, Sherghati took cognizance against the

accused in Complaint Case No.- 50/2018 vide Order dated

07.12.2018 under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

 A certified copy of the Complaint

Case No.- 50/2018 dated 23.01.2018

and the Order of Cognizance dated

07.12.2018 is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P1 of this

application.

5. That the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as

alleged in the complaint and has been falsely implicated in the

present case without any legal ground.

6. That the complainant has not filed any supporting documents with

the complaint petition to support his false allegations against the

petitioner.

7. That the allegation of the complainant is false and fabricated as the

complainant has forcefully got the blank stamp paper signed by the

petitioner after threatening him of dire consequences.

8. That it is most humbly submitted that it is clear from the S.A. of the

complainant and the complaint petition that the complainant has not

entrusted the goods (cement and iron rods) to the petitioner whereas

it has been supplied in a business transaction and unless there is

entrustment, there can be no offence under section 405 and 406 of

the Indian Penal Code.

9. That it is humbly submitted that to constitute an offence under

Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, there must be an allegation of

misappropriation done in dishonest manner, which is conspicuously

absent in the complaint.

10. That as the allegation against the petitioner is related to commercial

dispute arising out of business transaction and if there is a mere

breach of contract, that cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for

criminal breach of trust.

11. That the alleged dispute between the parties is essentially a civil

dispute resulting from a breach of contract, if the petitioner has not

made the payment against supply of cement and iron rods by the

complainant and in that case non-repayment of the price of goods

does not constitute offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal

Code.

12. That from the facts and circumstances of this case it is clear that the

implication of petitioner in the present case is totally false and

fabricated.

13. That the petitioner is a man of means and ready to furnish the proper

securities as directed by this Hon’ble Court and also ready to abide

by the terms and conditions as laid down Under Section 438 of Code

of Criminal Procedure.
 14. That the petitioner has applied for his anticipatory bail before the

Court of Sessions Judge, Gaya vide A.B.P. No. SH- 399 of 2023 and

prayer for the anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been rejected by

the Court of Sessions Judge, Gaya vide Order dated 19.07.2023.

It is, therefore prayed that your

Lordships may graciously be pleased

to enlarge the petitioner on

anticipatory bail in the event of their

arrest or surrender in connection

with Complaint Case No.- 50/2018

to the satisfaction of the Ld. Court of

Sri Gautam Kumar, JM 1st Class,

Sherghati, Gaya.

And/ Or

Pass such other order or orders as

your Lordships may deem fit and

proper.

And for this the petitioner shall ever pray.