IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41663 of 2008 1. DR. JAWED HASHMI @ IMTIYAZ AHMAD HASHMI 2. BIBI HASINA @ HASEENA BEGAM 3. MOINUDDIN @ MOHIUDDIN Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 5. 08.01.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, for the State and for Opposite party no. 2. The defence in a complaint case under Section 406, 420, 120B of the Penal Code is that the complainant was an Agent acting on behalf of certain individuals, when the complaint itself acknowledges that approximately a sum of Rs. 10,50,000/- has already been returned by the petitioners while it alleges certain further dues, which are matters of accounts. None of the individuals allegedly duped are complaining. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that in fact the dues of the individuals have been paid by the complainant. In the entirety of the matter, considering the commercial relation between the parties and substantial repayment admitted by the complainant himself, let the petitioners, abovenamed surrender in the court below within a period of six weeks from today, when they shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Araria in Complaint case No. 579 of 2007, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is not the appropriate forum for consideration of I.A. No. 11 of 2010. No 2 orders need be passed thereupon in this application. The complainant may have his remedy before the appropriate forum. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)