Bhanu Pratap Singh @ Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39317 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2024 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Nalanda ====================================================== Bhanu Pratap Singh @ Sonu Kumar Son of Sunil Singh Resident of Village - Shikshak Colony Ramchandrapur, P.S.- Laheri, District - Nalanda (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-09-2024 Heard Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, learned APP for the State.
2. Application for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case No.12 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 466, 467, 468, 419, 474, 477, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66, 66(B), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution alleges that the informant had been working as a Branch Manager in Fino Payment Bank Limited for rendering the banking service in remote area. The Bank appointed business correspondents-merchant, who used to play business for operating the Bank. On 08.01.2024, one Ritik Raj attached with the Bank as customer-merchant. On 31.01.2024, Cash-in-Team
2/4 of the Bank received various request for withdrawal of Rs.54,00,000/- through different customer-merchants. Out of which, in 23 transaction requests were made by the co-accused Ritik Raj from different location, due to which his requests were cancelled. On an internal enquiry, it came to know that said Ritik Raj by using his merchant ID has also facilitated payment of an amount of Rs.1,96,000/- in favour of one, Gulshan Kumar and by this way caused loss to the bank.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, however, during the course of investigation, the name of the petitioner surfaced on the confessional statement of the co-accused Ritik Raj, against whom the entire allegation revolves around. The said coaccused has been accorded the privilege of regular bail by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.34621 of 2024, vide order dated 26.07.2024. It is also contended that there is no material that he has any way withdrawn and facilitate the payment to any beneficiary fraudulently. So far the amount of Rs.1,96,000/- is concerned, the petitioner is neither beneficiary nor there is any material suggesting that he duped anyone. It is also not the case of the informant that the petitioner has any way caused any loss to the bank. The petitioner is a man having fair antecedent and
3/4 now he has been incarcerated since 02.02.2024.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and drawing the attention of this Court to some of the paragraphs of the case diary submitted that various suspicious transactions have been done through credit card of the petitioner, however, with respect to the aforesaid transaction, the informant has not come up with a case as to whether that has been done in relation to the Fino Payment Bank and thereby causing loss to the informant.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that there is specific allegation against the co-accused Ritik Raj and the entire FIR does not speaks about any involvement of any other accused persons. So far the co-accused Ritik Raj is concerned he has been allowed bail by this Court. The petitioner bears fair antecedent and now the investigation of the crime is complete and the charge-sheet has been submitted, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case No.12 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the
4/4 bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:- (i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the trial.
(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.
(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial. (iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.
(v) The court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.
(Harish Kumar, J) durgesh/- U T