Raj Kumar Prasad v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8767 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -369 Year- 2017 Thana -GANDHIMAIDAN District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Raj Kumar Prasad, Son of Late Radha Prasad, Resident of Village-Ojha Bigha, Police Station-Arwal, District-Arwal. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Regional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Veena Kumari Jaiswal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 03-04-2018 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 Gandhi Maidan PS case no. 369 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 201, 120B/34 of Indian Penal Code .

The allegation of the prosecution is that on account of irregularities in the office of the Bihar State Transport Corporation, Bankipore office, huge amount of money pertaining to the purchase of diesel was misappropriated by the employees in connivance with the employees of the petrol pump. It has been further alleged that the relevant pages of the ledgers regarding

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8767 of 2018 (3) dt.03-04-2018 2/3 entry of the petrol/ diesel money is also missing. It has been further alleged that on the basis of the writing of the petitioner, it has been found that the petitioner was then working under one Nagendra Singh, Cashier and in the process, a sum of Rs. 52,741/- and 56, 541 is alleged to have been misappropriated. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a general allegation of hypothetical mistake has been leveled against the petitioner herein and the petitioner is a government employee as such, there is no likelihood of him fleeing away. It is further submitted that the petitioner would join investigation and would cooperate in the investigation and the subsequent trial. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a clean antecedent.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioner to the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the abovenamed petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8767 of 2018 (3) dt.03-04-2018 3/3 cum-A.C.J.M. Patna in connection with Gandhi Maidan PS case no. 369 of 2017 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T