Bijay Narayan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20570 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2023 Thana- ISHUPUR BARAHAT DistrictBhagalpur ====================================================== Bijay Narayan Singh S/O Yadu Narayan Singh @ Yadunandan Singh R/O Mohalla-Golaghat, Garahiya, P.S.- Tatarpur, District-Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Branch Manager, Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank, Ishipur Barahat Branch, Bhagalpur Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rishi Raj Raman, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ishipur (Barahat) P.S. Case No. 100 of 2023 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, FIR was registered against Satyam Sinha and others for embezzlement of amounting to Rs.1,20,71,873.97 from the Ishipur Barahat Branch of South Bihar Rural Bank. The name of the petitioner tranpired for also being involved in the misappropriation of fund

2/4 as the person who verified certain transactions through his user ID along with main accused Saytam Sinha.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner has superannuated from the service on 31.03.2025. He was promoted to the post of Office Assistant on 16.09.2014 and was not having any prior knowledge of computer. Co-accused Satyam Sinha, the then Branch Manager, enhanced the financial limit of user ID of the petitioner to verify the transactions in routine manner. Whenever the petitioner raised any objection, the Branch Manager used to tell him that the entry and the posting have been done by him and he was responsible for any error.

The petitioner participated in the departmental proceeding initiated by the bank and the disciplinary authority came to a finding that petitioner has not received any direct financial benefit from the transaction and it has also been reported that involvement of the petitioner was not found. The petitioner suffered minor penalty of withholding of one increment for a period of six months vide order dated 24.04.2024 passed by disciplinary authority as the bank did not find any direct involvement of the petitioner in embezzlement of the fund.

3/4 provisional anticipatory bail vide order dated 19.10.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 67533 of 2023 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Other similarly placed co-accused have also been granted interim protection vide different orders by Co-ordinate Benches. The petitioner was apprehended from the bank branch where he was on duty. The petitioner is in custody since 31.01.2025 and he has got no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the nature of allegation and further considering the period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Bhagalpur/concerned Court in connection with Ishipur (Barahat) P.S. Case No. 100 of 2023, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also the following conditions : (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present

4/4 on each and every date fixed by the court below.

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T