Shahin Praveen v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23063 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2018 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

SHAHIN PRAVEEN Wife of Md. Ali Ansari 2.

Abdul Wahid Son of Late Ayub Ansari 3.

Madina Khatoon Wife of Abdul Wahid All resident of village- Rajopatti, Urdu Mohalla, Ward No. 14, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dumra P.S.Case No.285 of 2018 dated 23.7.2018 registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution story is that there is allegation of defalcation of government money of the scholarship by Murari Paswan in collusion with the accused persons and later on it transpires that the amounts have been transferred in the account of the petitioners.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23063 of 2019(4) dt.24-06-2019 2/2 that there is no account in the name of the petitioners and they have never got opened the account and not withdrawn the amount and the allegation is false and concocted. They are ready to give their signature to the Investigating Officer. Heard learned A.P.P. who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that the materials clearly show that the amounts were transferred in the accounts of the petitioners and the investigation is till going on. .

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, as such the prayer for bail of the petitioners is rejected. With the aforesaid direction, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T