Md Tufail Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19219 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2021 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda ====================================================== MD TUFAIL ANSARI Son of Abdul Rauf Ansari R/V- Makrandpur P.sGaighat Dist-Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-07-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No.357 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 469, 471, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is that, he, in conspiracy with other co-accused persons has fraudulently withdrawn money from the loan account of the customers. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner 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. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific overt act against the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19219 of 2023(3) dt.13-07-2023 2/2 petitioner. The petitioner was not entitled to provide ATM card and insta-kit to the consumer, rather, one Vikash Singh was entitled to provide the same. During the course of investigation, it came to light that Vikash Singh had give Rs.22 lakhs to one Karunesh Kumar. There is no direct allegation against the petitioner with respect to mischief of loan amount which is alleged to have been granted by the bank to the customers. The petitioner had resigned from the bank on 25.07.2021. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that there is ample of evidence available against the petitioner in the case diary. 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. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

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