SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 683

PATNA HIGH COURT
Kapil Tyagi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Cr.Misc.-76359/2024



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76359 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5993 Year-2022 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-

Patna

======================================================

1. Kapil Tyagi C/O. Tej Pal Tyagi Resident of 538 K/1264-2, Chanakyapuri,

P.S. - Maidiyanva, Sitapur Road, Triveni Nagar 3, Lucknow, Lucknow Uttar

Pradesh - 226021, Office address- L and T Finance Ltd Patna Office no 201

and 202, 2nd floor, Grand Aley Manawar, Gandhi Maidan Road, P.S.-

Gandhi Maidan, Near Panache Hotel, Patna - 800001, L and T Finance,Twin

Tower, 1st Floor South Gandhi Maidan, Patna - 800001

2. Anand Pratul @ Pratul Anand, Branch Head Son of Satya Narayan Tiwary

P.S.- Gandhi Maidan, Office address- L and T Finance Ltd, Office No. 201

and 202, 2nd floor, Grand Aley Manawar, Gandhi Maidan Road, Near

Panache, Patna. Permanent Resident of Chaudhary Tola, Near Flour Mill,

New Colony, Mahendru, P.S.- Sultanganuj, Patna, Bihar - 800006

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rajiv Kumar Son of Late Baban Rai Resident of Mohalla- Nakta Diyara,

Digha Ghat, P S - Digha, Town and District- Patna

3. Sachin Jha, Proprietor cum owner, Sachin Jha, Nexgen Agrico Khagaul

road, Danapur, Patna-801503, Bihar

4. Mahindra Finance through State Head 1st Floor, Plot no. 6, Besides Cimage

Institiute, Sri Krishna PUri, Near Children's Park, Patna-800001

... ... Opposite Party/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate

Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate

Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap, Advocate

Mr. Hritik Anand, Advocate

Mr. Astitva, Advocate

For the State : Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP

For the O.P. No. 2 : Ms. Jaya Singh, Advocate

Mr. Pranshu Prakash, Advocate

Mr. Chandramauli, Advocate

For the O.P. No. 4 : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Ray, Advocate

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 29-01-2026

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

counsel for the O.Ps. No. 2 and 4 as also the learned APP for the

State.

##PAGE2##

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76359 of 2024 dt.29-01-2026

2/8

2. This application has been preferred for quashing of

the cognizance order dated 18.07.2023 passed by the learned

Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna in Complaint Case No. 5993

of 2022 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471, 120(B)

and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The facts leading to the present application is to the

effect that the complainant had booked a Sonalika Tractor through

an authorized dealer namely Nexgen Agrico and had made a down

payment of Rs. 1 lakh, while a loan was financed by L&T Finance

Ltd. It has been alleged that the complainant had been paying the

installments since January, 2019 regularly however, on

05.02.2022, some agents of Mahindra Finance, accused nos. 2 to 6

snatched and seized the aforesaid tractor of the complainant stating

that the loanee of the tractor was a defaulter of repayment of loan

amount to accused nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 and 10. It has been alleged that

the complainant served a legal notice upon all the accused persons

but no response was given by the accused persons and, therefore,

the complaint was filed.

4. The learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna after

going through the solemn affirmation of the complaint, the

submissions on behalf of the complainant as well as the documents

filed in support of the complaint including the details of bank

##PAGE3##

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76359 of 2024 dt.29-01-2026

3/8

transaction and legal notice came to the conclusion that a prima

facie case is made out against all the accused persons namely 1.

Sachin Jha, 2. Sant Kumar Singh, 3. Nawnit Sinha, 4. Yogesh

Kumar, 5. Kapil Tyagi and 6. Anand Pratul.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners

submits that the petitioners were the Business Head and Branch

Head respectively at the time of occurrence. It has been submitted

that the petitioners had nothing to do with the aforesaid s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top