Saurav Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48950 of 2014 (2) dt.30-04-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48950 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -271 Year- 2014 Thana -BODHGAYA District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Saurav Kumar Son of Madan Prasad resident of Mohalla : Vikashpuri Colony, near Krishna Ara Mill, Khakhura, P.S. : Delha, District : Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sada Nand Ray For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shakir Ahmad(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No. 271 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 406, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner, working as receptionist and accountant of Bodh Gaya Children Aid Charitable Trust, fraudulently withdrew Rs. 3,50,000/- from the account of the said Trust and thereafter, left the service.

Submission is of false implication and that for withdrawal of such heavy amount information was given to the account holder and the petitioner has been implicated as he was demanding his wages.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48950 of 2014 (2) dt.30-04-2015 Learned APP duly assisted by the learned counsel representing the informant opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail by submitting that the petitioner withdrew the amount of Charitable Trust after forging the signature. It has further been submitted that during investigation it has come that the petitioner was seen in CCTV footage accepting the amount from the counter of the bank on the date of occurrence.

In the facts and circumstances stated above and considering that the involvement of the petitioner has been transpired in CCTV footage, this Court is not persuaded to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T