Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20962 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1131 Year-2022 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia ====================================================== ROHIT KUMAR SON OF SRI RAJENDRA KESHARI R/O NAYA TOLA, P.S.- KATIHAR, DISTRICT- KATIHAR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv Mr. Kumar Rajdeep. Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-07-2023 Heard the parties.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with K.Hat (Shayak) P.S. Case No.1131 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

As per the FIR, on 23.10.2022, one Vishal Raj informed the informant regarding shortage of Rs.43,00,000/- in the branch vault. On receiving the said information, the informant and Zonal Manager went to the Branch Office came and checked the vault and found shortage of Rs.43,28,802/-. On enquiry, Vishal Raj accepted that he along with the petitioner have misappropriated the said amount.

4.

It is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20962 of 2023(3) dt.24-07-2023 2/2 that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. Petitioner was on annual leave prior to alleged occurrence. On 13.10.2022, the petitioner handed over keys as well as the charge of vault to Branch Manager. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. 5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner is that he and co-accused Vishal Raj misappropriated Rs.43,28,802/= of the Fino Payments Bank, Purnea.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. 7.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T