Raj Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28832 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2019 Thana- SHRIKRISHNAPURI District- Patna ====================================================== RAJ KUMAR THAKUR Son of Ram Janam Thakur Resident of MohallaNew Patna Colony, Beur, Road No. 2, P.S.- Beur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-09-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 379, 420, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, this petitioner, who is an employee of a Construction Company, is alleged to have collected cheques and cash from various customers of his company in his own name for booking flats in his construction company and thereby caused loss of Rs. 8-10 lakhs to the Company. It is further alleged that petitioner defalcated Rs. 2 laksh from the cash counter of the office of the Company. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. It is submitted that none of the alleged duped customers have made any complaint before the police or any other

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28832 of 2021(3) dt.27-09-2021 2/2 authorities and only at the instance of the informant police has registered the present case and the fact is that informant owes dues of the petitioner as arrears of salary and when he demanded his salary this false case has been lodged against this petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2020 and charge sheet has already been submitted in this case. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during the course of investigation it has come in paragraph 31, 33 and 35 of case diary that petitioner collected cash and cheques from different customers of the Company and deposited the same in his own account. Charges are yet to be framed in this case and evidence of the witnesses are to recorded.

Considering the facts of the case and the nature of accusation against this petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. Since the petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2020, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial as soon as possible.

BKS/- Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T