Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38725 of 2011 (4) dt.01-05-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.38725 of 2011 ====================================================== Rama Shankar Prasad Singh @ Shankar Singh, S/o Late Ayodhya Singh, R/o Mohalla- Shankarwar Tola, Mokama, P.S. Mokama, District- Patna. At present residing at A.G. Colony, House No. A/290, Mokama Kothi, P.S. Shastri Nagar, Disrtrict- Patna. .... .... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Parveen Kumar Singh, S/o Nameshwar Singh Nirala, Mohalla- Mahatma Gandhi Nagar, P.S. Agamkuan, District- Patna. .... .... Opposite Parties. CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER 4 01-05-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 978 (C) of 2011, registered under [STATUTE] and Section 138 of N.I. Act. It is alleged that there was agreement between the complainant and the petitioner for sale of property. In consequence thereof the complainant was paid Rs. 21,00,000/- (Twenty lakhs) out of 34,00,000/-. Thereafter, the complainant came to know that the land is under litigation and the matter is pending before Hon’ble High Court whereupon the complainant refused to purchase the land and asked the petitioner to return the money. Thereafter, the petitioner asked the complainant to return the original agreement, the complainant returned the original agreement and petitioner issued post dated cheque which was Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38725 of 2011 (4) dt.01-05-2012 deposited by the complainant in his account and the same was dishonoured with a note “stop payment”. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is case of breach of contract hence no offence is made out under [STATUTE] . and the case is made out for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act and has taken plea he has paid amount of Rs. 21,00,000/- (Twenty one lakhs) in cash. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that he entered into agreement on false pretext. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner surrender and pray for regular bail then it may be considered on its own merit without being prejudice of the order. m.p. (Gopal Prasad, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 420

Statute Text:
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Cheating and there by dishonestly inducing delivery of property, or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.