Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10269/2018rejected

Ramakant Kumar v. South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited Through Its Chirman Electric Supply Division, Gaya

2018-03-21Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10269 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2015 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Ramakant Kumar, son of Late Ram Nandan Prasad, resident of village-Mok, P.S. Konch, District-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner.

Versus

South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited through its Chairman, Electric Supply Division, Gaya (Urban), District-Gaya. ... ... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikaram Deo Singh, Advocate.

Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate.

For the Electricity Department : Mr. Ajay Kumar Gautam, Advocate.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 21-03-2018 Heard.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No.53 of 2015 registered under Sections 420, 409, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, earlier, while the prayer of the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. No.18364 of 2015 but, later on, the petitioner, who is Junior Accounts Clerk in Electricity Department, has deposited the defalcated amount of Rs.7678/- in the concerned Department.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10269 of 2018(2) dt.21-03-2018 2/2 Admittedly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of prearrest bail has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. No.18364 of 2015. I find no reason to reconsider the prayer of the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail stands rejected. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the trial court for grant of regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T