Case Law Details
Avinash Kumar S/o Suresh Prasad @ Suresh Prasad Jaiswal Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court)
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with a criminal case registered under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, had defalcated ₹6.60 crore by issuing fake GST bills and using forged documents.
The petitioner contended that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated due to an ongoing dispute regarding shareholding in Hopecon Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., where he and his brother held a 50% stake. It was argued that the FIR had been lodged by one of the company’s directors to gain control of the company. The petitioner also submitted that the company’s accounts had been audited every financial year by an independent auditor without any irregularities being detected.
The State and the informant opposed the anticipatory bail application, alleging that the petitioner was the key conspirator and principal offender who had abused a position of trust to commit criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery and economic fraud. It was alleged that the petitioner transferred ₹6.60 crore from the company to his proprietorship concern and raised 857 GST invoices, comprising 583 invoices in October 2024 and 274 invoices in January 2025, amounting to ₹5.84 crore. The prosecution further stated that the invoices were recalled only after intervention by the informant and that the petitioner had four criminal antecedents.
Considering the nature of the accusations and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, the Patna HC rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PATNA HIGH COURT
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Patliputra P. S. Case No. 421 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. It is alleged that this petitioner along with other accused persons defalcated the amount of Rs. 6.60 crores by issuing fake GST bills and using forged documents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner along with his brother is 50% shareholder in Hopecon Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. where there is ongoing dispute regarding shareholding and present F.I.R. has been instituted by one of the Directors of the company to coerce petitioner and his brother with sole intention to usurp the entire company. It is further submitted that in every financial year, audit of the company takes place by an independent auditor in which no irregularities were found and petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with an ulterior motive.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner is key conspirator and principal offender who while occupying a position of trust committed well-planned act of criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery and economic fraud. Petitioner transferred Rs. 6.60 crores from M/s Hopecon Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. to M/s Hope Traders, a proprietorship of petitioner with sole intention of misappropriating the goodwill and reputation of the company of informant. Petitioner raised 857 invoices in which 583 invoices were for the month of October 2024 and 274 invoices raised in January 2025, filed in the month of February 2025 amounting to Rs. 5.84 crores against M/s Hopecon Infra Pvt. Ltd. It is only after the intervention of the informant that those GST invoices were recalled by the petitioner firm citing inadvertent mistake. It is further submitted that petitioner is a habitual offender and has got four criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal antecedents, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused.
Author Bio
