IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33350 of 2008 DHANANJAY KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2. 12. 01. 09. Heard. The petitioner prays for canceling the bail granted to Opposite Party No. 2, by the Sessions Judge, Patna, by order dated 28. 4. 2008 passed in Mehendiganj P.S. Case No. 8/2008, registered under Sections 406, 420, 421, 422, 379, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Sessions Judge while granting bail took into consideration the submission of Opposite Party No. 2 that it is a simple case of cheque bouncing issued by the petitioner for Rs. 6,00,000/- in favour of the informant to repay the loan amount, which lays civil dispute in between the parties. The further submission was that Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C. are not applicable and Section 379 of the I.P.C. is ornamental, as such arrest of the petitioner can not be justified. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if notice is issued, compromise between the parties may arise in the case. After hearing the parties, this Court observes that parties may exercise the aforesaid option in the court of Sessions Judge, if so advised, as the petitioner states that he has been cheated a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/-. This Court further observes that the trial should proceed without unnecessary adjournment. As such this Court directs that Opposite Party No. 2 would not physically absent in the court below - 2 - for two consecutive dates at a stretch till four witnesses be examined. With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of. m.p. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)