Indu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25449 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2022 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== Indu Kumari Wife of Prakash Chaudhary Resident of Village- Gajodih, Police Station- Govindpur, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr.Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party :
Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 120(B) 420 and of the Indian Penal Code .
3. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner (who was ward member) along with other co-accused persons are alleged to have misappropriated Rs. 26 lakh of the government fund which was allotted for the execution of Nal Jal Yojana.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the FIR itself, it is clear that only four cheque no. 512021 to 512024 were issued under signature of Petitioner and Shankar Prasad (Secretary of Ward No. 14) and later on cheque book was snatched by Ashutosh Kumar @ Anshu, Sudhir Kumar, Rakesh Kumar, Khushboo Kumari, Anita
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25449 of 2024(4) dt.09-08-2024 2/2 Kumari, Anuj Kumar and others which was also supported by detailed status of A/C No. 72780100057713 of Ward Kriyanwayan Avam Prabhandan Samiti Ward No. 14 Gram Panchayat Baksauti. He submits that according to A/C details, neither any cheque was issued by petitioner nor any single paisa was withdrawn by her. Hence, offence Under Section 409, 420, 120(B) I.P.C. not made out against petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent. Charge has also been framed on 6.6.2024. Petitioner is in custody since 2.1.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in Govindpur Police Station Case No. 260 of 2022. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T