Satyendra Rai@Stayendra Ray @ Satyandra Roy v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24119 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-414 Year-2020 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== SATYENDRA RAI@STAYENDRA RAY @ SATYANDRA ROY Son of Late Yougeswar Roy Resident of Village - Morbagadh, P.S.- Tajpur , Distt.- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satrudhan Rai, Advocate Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Bank :

Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-01-2022 Heard the parties through video conferencing. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody since 09.12.2020, seeks regular bail in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 414 of 2020, for the offence punishable under Sections 34, 409, 379 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that petitioner being the agent of the Samastipur Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tajpur Branch, Samastipur realized money from the customers and did not deposit the same in their respective account and thus misappropriated Rs. 4,65,700/-. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24119 of 2021(5) dt.27-01-2022 2/3 petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that it is Branch Manager of the bank, who had not deposited the said money, which was collected by the petitioner. The petitioner used to give the money to Branch Manager, being agent of the bank in good faith. Sri Rajeev Ranjan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank submits that appropriate action be taken against all the officials, including the Branch Manager, who are posted at the relevant point of time.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has prima facie established that he is innocent and he is in custody since 09.12.2020, the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 414 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24119 of 2021(5) dt.27-01-2022 3/3 concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(4) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.

(Purnendu Singh, J) manish/- U T