Navin Kumar Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25598 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -13 Year- 2017 Thana -DALSINGHSARAI District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Navin Kumar Choudhary Son of Sri Vishwanath Choudhary, Resident of Village- Jorpura, P.S.- Tajpur (Halai O.P.), District- Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Bansh Dubey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 27-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in custody since 20.01.2017 in connection with Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 13/17 for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, as lodged by the informant, is that the petitioner being a correspondent agent of State Bank of India, A.D.B. Branch, Customer Service, Dalsingsarai had fraudulently withdrawn the deposited amount from her account and the account of many other customers.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, bears no criminal history and that he

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25598 of 2017 (5) dt.27-07-2017 2/2 was appointed as agent of the said branch for customer service in the year 2016, but the amounts were deposited by the consumers since 2013 onwards during which one Sarswati Prakash Pandey was the correspondent agent of customer service. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted, hence, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence. However, learned APP for the State submits that the petitioner being the correspondent agent of customer service has embezzled the huge amount of villagers from their accounts either by not depositing the amount or withdrawing the said amount, which has come during investigation, hence, opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 13/17, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur. Application for bail is, accordingly, rejected. (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- U T