Does Repayment of Substantial Loan Amounts and Ongoing Payments Weigh in Favor of Granting Anticipatory Bail in Offences Under Sections 406/420 IPC?

The High Court affirms that in cases involving alleged criminal breach of trust and cheating, where the accused demonstrates substantial repayment, ongoing instalments, and cooperation with investigation, anticipatory bail may be granted subject to statutory conditions; this judgment clarifies and strengthens existing bail principles, and stands as binding precedent within Jharkhand.

Practical Impact

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

• When substantial repayment has been made and there is ongoing repayment, courts may be more inclined to grant anticipatory bail in Section 406/420 IPC disputes.
• Cooperation with investigation (appearance before the IO) is a positive factor for applicants.
• Attempt by the informant to seize property may be considered relevant to the context of the FIR and bail.
• Bail is subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
• Lawyers should highlight instances of partial repayment and ongoing cooperation to strengthen anticipatory bail applications in financial dispute cases.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

• The Court considered that the petitioner had taken loans on an agreed interest rate and was making regular payments, including having already paid a substantial portion of the principal.
• The petitioner’s continued instalments and return of Rs.4,50,000/- out of the principal was taken as a bona fide gesture.
• The Court noted allegations of attempted land grab by the informant as part of the dispute’s context.
• The petitioner’s cooperation with the investigation (by appearing before the IO and explaining circumstances) was emphasized.
• Having weighed these factors, and subject to compliance with Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Court granted anticipatory bail.
• No overrule or new legal principle; rather, it clarifies that financial disputes with demonstrated repayments and cooperation are strong grounds for bail.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner

• Petitioner was in urgent need of money for his sister’s marriage and took loans of Rs.6 lakhs and Rs.1 lakh at 2% monthly interest.
• He has been repaying regularly, paying Rs.14,000/- per month, and has already returned Rs.4.5 lakhs of the principal.
• The informant is wrongly seeking to seize petitioner’s land.
• FIR has been lodged only to recover the remaining amount.

State

• Opposed anticipatory bail, asserting that the FIR was properly lodged on the basis of the allegations.

Informant

• Opposed anticipatory bail; contended that the full amount has not been returned by the petitioner.

Factual Background

The petitioner borrowed Rs.6 lakhs and an additional Rs.1 lakh from the informant at 2% monthly interest. He claims to have paid Rs.14,000/- every month towards interest and has returned Rs.4.5 lakhs of the principal. The informant allegedly tried to take the petitioner’s land. When the full repayment was not made promptly, an FIR was filed against the petitioner under Sections 406, 420, 504, and 506 of the IPC. The petitioner has appeared before the investigating officer to explain his side.

Statutory Analysis

• The Court applied Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as the charges in the FIR.
• For anticipatory bail, the Court relied on the provisions of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, specifically Section 482(2), which governs statutory bail conditions.
• No interpretation of the scope or application beyond the direct statutory reference to bail conditions.

Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary

No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment.

Procedural Innovations

• The Court specifically directed compliance with Section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as a condition for bail.

Alert Indicators

• Precedent Followed – Existing anticipatory bail principles applied and clarified.