Neelam Devi @ Neelam Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27722 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-445 Year-2024 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna ====================================================== Neelam Devi @ Neelam Kumari W/O Shiv Shankar Mishra R/O - Andhar Karma, P.S - Bikram Ganj, District - Rohtash, At Present Residing of Mohalla Rajendra Nagar Road no. 10, P.S - Kadamkuan, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 445 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), and 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that after the death of informant's father in 2020, her aunt, Neelam Kumari (petitioner), in connivance with the then Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, Exhibition Road, Patna fraudulently withdrew Rs. 5,02,027/- from her later father's account by using forged documents and transferred the amount to her own account without informing the legal heirs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27722 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. She has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner and informant are close relative and she is own sister of Late Raj Kumar Mishra and he had executed a Basiyatnama in favour of petitioner for entire movable and immovable properties for which petitioner was filed a probate case bearing no. 40 of 2020 which has been converted in Title Suit Case No. 5 of 2022.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the fact that there is no denial of the fact that the petitioner is beneficiary of Rs. 5,02,027/- which she has been alleged to have illegally withdrawn from the account of the informant's late father and has thus played a direct role, the allegation being of serious in nature, this Court is thus not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.
Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U T