Parmanand Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3886 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2017 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Parmanand Singh, Son of Sri Rameshwar Singh, Resident of Village-Dyalpur, Post-Sangita Baitha, Bhayakahalgaon, P.S.-Antichak, District-Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bhola Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 20-02-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Kahalgaon (Ghogha) P.S. Case No. 348 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409,419,420/34 of Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged in the written report that petitioner was posted as Sub-Postmaster along with Uma Shankar Singh who was posted as Office Assistant in Sub-Post Office, Ghogha. They have defalcated amount from the account of different pass-book holders. As mentioned in written report, they have committed fraud of total Rs. 34,12,811/-. After holding preliminary enquiry, it has been found that the allegations leveled against the petitioner is true and recommended for lodging FIR against the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3886 of 2018(4) dt.20-02-2018 2/2 petitioner and co-accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the half-heartedness of the informant is clear that the dead man Uma Shankar Singh has been made accused in this case. It has been further submitted that this petitioner has been made scape goat in this case. The investigation is still pending. Learned APP for the State has submitted that it has come in para 35 of the case diary that departmental enquiry was also held and report has been received.

In such circumstances, this court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail petition stands rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail which will be considered by the court below in accordance with law and disposed off preferably on the same day, without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) khushbu/- U T