Kameshwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38688 of 2023 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16158 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2022 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Kameshwar Singh Son of Late Ram Naresh Singh, Resident of village - Balathua, P.S. - Sasaram, Distt. - Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Chief Manager, Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank, Usman Complex, Rauza Road, Sasaram, Branch- Sasaram, PIN- 821115.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jay Prakash Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP For the OP No. 2 :

Mr. Mahesh Kumar Prasad, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ved Prakash Srivastava, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-11-2023 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The instant petition has been filed for the modification of the condition imposed in the order dated 28.04.2023 passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 16158 of 2023 preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner prayed for to provide the details of the bank account of O.P. No. 2 in which he can deposit the alleged amount and he has also prayed for to extend the period from two to four years to deposit the alleged amount. 3.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that though he has got the details of the bank account of the O.P. No. 2, in which the alleged amount is to be deposited, after filing the instant petition, but the petitioner is not able to deposit the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38688 of 2023(8) dt.03-11-2023 2/2 alleged amount within the period of two years as directed by this Court in the order dated 28.04.2023 as the petitioner depends on his agriculture income only.

4.

Learned counsel for the bank opposed the petitioner's prayer and submits that petitioner is not entitled to any leniency with regard to the extension of period in which he is bound to deposit the alleged amount as sufficient time period has been given to him to deposit the alleged amount.

5.

Considering the above submissions, this Court is not inclined to accept the petitioner's prayer with regard to the extension of the period in which he is bound to deposit the alleged amount as per the direction given in the order dated 28.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16158 of 2023 and so far as the petitioner's prayer with regard to the requirement of the details of bank account of O.P. No. 2 in which he can deposit the alleged amount, he has got the details of the said bank account after filing this case as submitted above, so there is no need to pass any order on this aspect. Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of. (Shailendra Singh, J) Shahnawaz/- U T