Gaurav Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23669 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-231 Year-2024 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Gaurav Kumar S/o Late Hemant Kumar Hem R/o Village- Singhya Bujurg (South), ward no. 12, P.O.- Singhiya Ghat, P.S.- Bibhutipur, DistrictSamastipur (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 05-05-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 231 of 2024 lodged on 26.07.2024, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 467 & 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against the sole petitioner. It has been alleged in the FIR that by obtaining the IDs of the staff members, petitioner fraudulently changed the status of dormant accounts to active and also changed the mobile number of the account holders of Singhiaghat branch, Samastipur and thereafter, withdrew the entire money available in the dormant account.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23669 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that petitioner is the care taker of a private ATM and he has nothing to do with the transfer of money etc. and his work was providing water, cleaning and branch officials used to take small work from him. Counsel submits that the petitioner has unnecessarily been made accused in this case being a scapegoat. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has done fraudulent act by obtaining the IDs of staff members and transferred money.
6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T