Sushil Kumar Pathak @ Sushil Kr. Pathak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10684 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2011 Thana -JAMHORA District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Sushil Kumar Pathak @ Sushil Kr. Pathak S/o Gupteshwar Pathak R/o village- Pathak Bigha, P.S. Jamhore, District Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Yogendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 28-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. The petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.12.2016 in connection with Jamhore P.S. Case No. 30 of 2011 for offence alleged under Sections 406, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that the petitioner being the Director of one OCPL Company, which dealt with insurance, had appointed the informant/complainant as an Advisor and certain amount of salary and commission was due. It has further been stated in the complaint that money of various beneficiaries, who took insurance, has also been taken by the petitioner and other accused persons and has not returned the maturity amount

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10684 of 2017 (2) dt.28-03-2017 2/2 of the depositors.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. The petitioner, like the informant/complainant, was an employee of the said OCPL Company and that other co-accused have since been granted the privilege of bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 21348 of 2015 on 8.10.2015. Learned counsel submits that a large number of cases have been lodged by the depositors and in all of which the petitioner is on bail. However, learned A.P.P., for the State, opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Jamhore P.S. Case No. 30 of 2011. (Nilu Agrawal, J) S.Pandey/- U T