IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21354 of 2018
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1772 Year- 2016 Thana -GAYA
COMPLAINT CASE District- GAYA

Sharique Qaiser, Son of late Qaiser Alam, Resident of
Mohalla-Nagmati Colony, Road No.-5, P.S.-Civil Lines,
District-Gaya-823001.

…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Md. Jawed Khan, S/o Md. Jamal Khan, Mohalla-
Karimganj, Road No.-2, Lane No.-7, P.S.-Civil Lines,
District-Gaya.

…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gouranga Chatterjee
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ramchandra Sahani

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER

2 26-04-2018 A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

complainant/O.P. No. 2. Let it be taken on the record.

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in

connection with Complaint Case No. 1772 of 2016 instituted

for the offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

The complainant/O.P. No. 2 had entered into an

agreement with the father of the petitioner for the purposes

of running the LPG store as a joint venture. The agreement

indicates that on the investment of money by the

complainant/O.P. No. 2, he shall be entitled to 50 percent of

the profits and would also have his rights to inspect the
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.21354 of 2018 (2) dt.26-04-2018

2/3

records and the accounts of the company. As the allegation

stands, the father of the petitioner died and the

complainant/O.P. No. 2 was left absolutely high and dry. He

was not paid the profits and the money is not being returned

by the son/petitioner.

According to the allegation made in the complaint

petition, a total amount of Rs. 12,00,000/-(twelve lakhs) was

invested by the complainant/O.P. No. 2.

Mr. Gouranga Chatterjee, learned counsel for the

petitioner, however submits that the allegation is absolutely

false. In the first instance, there was no agreement with the

petitioner. At the time when the agreement was executed,

the petitioner was only a student of B.C.A and was not

involved with the affairs of the company in which the

complainant/O.P. No. 2 had invested his money. Apart from

this, it has been submitted by Mr. Chatterjee that he is in

possession of a receipt of Rs. 2,00,000/-(two lakhs) which

was paid by his father to the complainant/O.P. No. 2. He

further submits that if the accounts are inspected, it would

become very evident that more than Rs. 12,00,000/-(twelve

lakhs) has been paid to the complainant/O.P. No. 2.

However, this Court is not going into the aforesaid

question as it relates to accounts. The O.P. No. 2, may, if so

advised, seeks necessary remedy for recovery of the money
Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.21354 of 2018 (2) dt.26-04-2018

3/3

which had been invested. However, so far as the allegation

under Section 406 I.P.C. is concerned as against the

petitioner, there is no material on which the anticipatory bail

could be denied to him.

Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner,

above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before

learned Court below within a period of four weeks from

today, be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st

Class, Gaya in connection with Complaint Case No. 1772 of

2016.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J)

Shageer/-

U T