Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29976/2015dismissed

Uma Kant Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2015-09-22Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29976 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -162 Year- 2013 Thana -BHELDI District- SARAN ====================================================== Uma Kant Pandey Son of Sri Ramdutt Pandey, Resident of Village - Tarwara, P.S. - Bheldi, District - Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Ravish For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kr.Jha(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 22-09-2015 Heard both sides The petitioner seeks bail in a case under Sections 467, 468, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner was a Clerk-cum-Cashier in Chapra Branch of the Bank of India. One of the account holders of the Bank made complaint regarding illegal withdrawal from his account. On enquiry it was found that the petitioner, while working as Clerk-cum-Cashier, illegally withdrew huge sums of money from the accounts of different account holders. The Branch Manager of the Bank of India has already lodged a case for illegal withdrawal. The petitioner made interpolations in the accounts of different account holders and withdrew huge amount illegally. It is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29976 of 2015 (3) dt.22-09-2015 2/2 submitted that the family of the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 5,70,000/- with the Bank. It is submitted that the petitioner is in jail for about a year. The petitioner has already been dismissed from service.

Having considered the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner, being a Clerk-cum-Cashier, illegally withdrew huge amount from accounts of different account holders including the informant, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Bheldi P.S. Case No. 162 of 2013 (G.R. No. 4255/13). Accordingly, the same is rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within nine months from the date of receipt / production of this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Dilip/- U T