IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52175 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-544 Year-2022 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1. Nitin Kumar Kantilal Dobariya @ Nitin Kumar Son Of Kantilal Dobariya Village- Metro Recycle Industrial State Morbi, Rajkot Highway, Ps- Tankara, Dist- Morbi, Gujrat 2. Mittal Nitin Bhai Dobariya @ Mittal @ Mital Wife Of Nitin Kumar Kantilal Dobariya @ Nitin Kumar Village- Metro Recycle Industrial State Morbi, Rajkot Highway, Ps- Tankara, Dist- Morbi, Gujrat 3. Tarang Ramesh Bhai Rudani @ Tarang Son Of Ramesh Bhai Rudani Village- Metro Recycle Industrial State Morbi, Rajkot Highway, Ps- Tankara, Dist- Morbi, Gujrat 4. Vantia Ben Rameshbhai @ Banita @ Bantiyaben Rameshbhai Rudani Wife Of Ramesh Bhai Rudani Village- Metro Recycle Industrial State Morbi, Rajkot Highway, Ps- Tankara, Dist- Morbi, Gujrat ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ashutosh kumar son of ashok kumar village- aka inn venture pvt. Ltd. Near block colony, ward no. 25, daudnagar, dist- aurangabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rajiv Kr. Singh, Advocate Mr. Prahojot Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 13 04-08-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case no.544 of 2022 registered under sections 406, 420, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case according to the F.I.R arising out of a complaint sent under Section 156(iii) Cr.P.C, is that the complainant and the petitioners had entered into a written agreement for supply of certain items and the complainant had Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52175 of 2024(13) dt.04-08-2025 2/4 paid the entire money but the accused persons did not supply the required items. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to an agreement between the parties, the firm of the opposite party no.2 had to pay an amount of Rs.1,17,41,540/- to the petitioners as price of the machinery and as against the same, nine cheques of different dates in the name of petitioners’ firm were issued by the wife of the opposite party no.2 amounting to a total of Rs. 94 lakhs. It is contended emphatically that petitioners had supplied the machines which were duly received by the informant/opposite party no.2 and the machines are still present in the premises in the informant’s company. It is the further case of the petitioners that 5 out of the 9 cheques given by the wife of the informant, got dishonored due to insufficiency of funds for which five cases under the 138 of the N.I. Act were filed by the petitioners before the learned C.J.M, Gujarat and only as a counter blast, the present complaint came to be lodged subsequently, on 18.06.2022. Further, the case is purely civil in nature arising out of business transactions. The petitioners are the businessmen of Gujarat, having no criminal antecedent. The petitioners undertake to co- operate in case/trial. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52175 of 2024(13) dt.04-08-2025 3/4 5. Learned counsel for the informant, however, opposes the grant of anticipatory bail and submits that as a matter of fact despite taking a huge amount from the informant’s wife, no machines have been supplied by the petitioners in lieu thereof. Paragraph no.1 of the complaint has been specifically pointed out that plea taken by the petitioners of supplying the machines on 24.03.2021 gets falsified on the ground that both the parties had entered into a written agreement on a subsequent date i.e. on 24.06.2021 after the informant had paid an amount of Rs.34,16,964. He further submits that the amount of Rs.10,96,368/-, paid by cheque no.13601 which had got dishonored, was paid by way of RTGS and further both the parties have entered into a compromise agreement dated 05.03.2025 before the learned C.J.M at Morbi, Gujarat in case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, however, the petitioners have no knowledge about the same. 6.Taking the rival contention of the parties and also considering the fact that the dispute is arising out of business transactions relating to matters of accounting between the parties, showing essentially a civil nature of dispute between them, it is directed that the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52175 of 2024(13) dt.04-08-2025 4/4 within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case no.544 of 2022 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023 and further, one of the bailors would be a local person. Harsh/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T