Md. Saddam Hussain v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44111 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -67 Year- 2016 Thana -KASBA District- - =========================================================== Md. Saddam Hussain,/o Md. Taiyab @ Taifu,Resident of Village-Kajha, P.S.-K. Nagar, District-Purnea .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Regional Manager, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Regional Office, Sri Nagar Hata, Koshi Colony, Purnea .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajit Narain Kumar, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P.

For the O.P. No. 2 :

Mr. Prabhakar Jha, Advocate.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 18-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2, who has suo motu appeared.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Kasba P.S. Case No. 67 of 2016 dated 02.07.2016 registered under Sections 420/467/ 408/468/406/409/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, after obtaining the password of the Bank Manager, had transferred huge amount of money to his account from various other accounts of the Bank including his relatives and other villagers. Learned counsel submits that he is a contractor providing generator facility to the Bank premises and had no connection with its work and thus, the allegation

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44111 of 2016 dt.18-10-2016 2/2 that he had fraudulently used the password for making transaction, is untenable. It is further submitted that the petitioner is semi-literate and cannot read or write in English.

Learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the O.P. No 2 submit that the petitioner is not innocent for the reason that admittedly, huge amount of money was deposited in his account, which is unexplained and further, he has also returned some money, which shows his complicity.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Sujit/- U