Patna High CourtCR. MISC./54781/2017dismissed

Krishna Kant Mandal @ Pappu Mandal And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

2017-12-19Mr. Justice Sanjay Priya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54781 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -516 Year- 2015 Thana -MADHUBANI TOWN DistrictMADHUBANI ======================================================

1. Krishna Kant Mandal @ Pappu Mandal

2. Girish Chandra Mandal @ Lal Babu Mandal Both sons of Ram Awatar Mandal, resident of Village- Naya Gaon, P.S. Raiyam, District- Darbhanga.

3. Shiv Shankar Mandal, son of Late Bouku Mandal, resident of VillageBhairav Balia, Dih Tol, P.S. Sakri, District Madhubani. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ashok Kumar Singh 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 19-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Madhubani (Town) P.S. Case No.516 of 2015 instituted for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged in the complaint petition that the complainant along with his wife was working as Junior Agent. He deposited about Rs.10 lacs in five funds of Vishal Group of Companies. The aforesaid amount belonged to 200 poor unemployed persons and villagers who were the account holder. The Branch was closed when time of payment of maturity came. The complainant contacted the petitioners who were Director and Manager of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54781 of 2017 (3) dt.19-12-2017 2/2 aforesaid organization of Madhubani Branch, but the money was not paid to the depositors. As such there is specific allegation of overt act of misappropriating of the money of depositors against these petitioners.

Therefore, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners stands rejected. The petitioners may surrender and make prayer for regular bail which shall be disposed of by the court below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Sanjay Priya, J) N.H./- U T