IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.282 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1477 Year-2015 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE District- Rohtas ====================================================== Rajendra Chaudhari @ Rajendra Singh S/O Late Ashmuni Choudhary R/O Vill.- Patadhi, P.S- Shiv Sagar, Dist - Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Arun Kumar Chaubey S/O Sri Ramashankar Chaubey R/O Vill.- Asarbaliya, P.o - Kewdhi P.S- Kudra , Dist - Kaimur (Bhabhua) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Binod Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 04-02-2025 Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner, along with Niladri Gupta and Kaushik Gupta, came to the complainant to purchase paddy. It is alleged that on the assurance of this petitioner that payment would be made within two weeks, paddy was sold by the complainant but the accused persons but the accused persons did not make payment. It is further alleged that complainant sold total 56.16 quintal of Basmati paddy to the accused persons who issued a cheque of Rs. 1,23,552/- which Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.282 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2025 2/3 bounced due to insufficiency of funds. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner never opened any centre for purchasing basmati rice; rather, co-accused Niladri Gupta and Kaushik Gupta, were involved in the business of buying paddy from farmers, and they had purchased a huge quantity of basmati rice from local farmers and Canara Bank, Sasaram, was the real custodian of the stored paddy. It is further submitted that even the cheque in question was not issued by the petitioner. It is further submitted that similarly situated persons, in many identical nature of cases, have been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court, as would be evident from Annexure-P/3 Series to the bail petition. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, nature of accusation and claim based on parity, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed. 7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.282 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2025 3/3 petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram in connection with Complaint Case No. 1477 of 2015, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. shashank/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T