Jitendra Kumar Srivastava v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7805 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2022 Thana- KAJI MUHAMMADPUR DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Jitendra Kumar Srivastava S/O Late Surendra Prasad Srivatava R/O Shivpuri Chitkohra, P.S- Gardanibagh, Dist.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1 .

The State of Bihar 2.

Raghunath Sah S/O Late Bisheshwar Sah R/O Village- Dadar, P.SAhiyapur, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lala Sheshendra Narayan Rais , Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar , APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State .

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 409 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code .

3 . As per the prosecution case , petitioner is the manager of Dhanloty Developers Limited, (an institution in Patna and its other branch is situated at Muzaffarpur Kalabag Road. It is further alleged that this petitioner convinced the complainant and others to open account in the said institution and assured that the money invested in this institution would be returned with lucrative interest. It is further alleged that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7805 of 2025(2) dt.04-03-2025 2/3 petitioner appointed four agents, who opened account of about hundred persons and after sometime , petitioner closed the office at Muzaffarpur and fled away and did not return either capital amount or interest to the account holders and thus, committed fraud and forgery with complainant and others. It is further alleged that the complainant sent legal notice to petitioner but petitioner did not replied the same , then complainant filed the present case against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case . At the relevant time , petitioner was staff/agent of the Dhanloty Developers limited. The entire alleged amount which was invested by complainant/informant in the account of Dhanloty Developers limited in the year 2012 to 2016 and not a single penny has been deposited in the account of petitioner or through the petitioner. As a matter of fact, complainant/ informant was an agent of the alleged said company and as such the informant invested money in the account of Dhanloty Developers limited Company . He further submits that petitioner has already resigned from the post of regional manager on 02.06.2017 and there was no complain against the petitioner either by company or by the complainant during his entire work

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7805 of 2025(2) dt.04-03-2025 3/3 period.

5 . Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that petitioner was regional manager in the alleged company and on the persuasion of this petitioner, complainant/informant invested Rs. 6,24,400/- and on maturity , the said company refused to pay the matured amount with interest and thus, petitioner along with other co-accused persons misappropriated the amount and cheated the informant.

6. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of offence and other circumstances of the case , prayer for prearrest bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T