Patna High CourtCR. MISC./79402/2018bail rejected

Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-05-03Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79402 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2018 Thana- BACHHWARA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Santosh Kumar S/o Manoj Pandit R/vill-Godhna, P.S-Bachwara, Distt.- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ansul, Advocate For the S.B.I.

Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-05-2019 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of O.P. No.2 and the leaned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bachwara P.S. Case No. 140 of 2018, registered under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(c) and 66(d) of the I.T. Act, pending in the court of the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Begusarai.

The accusation is that informant Md. Kalam withdrew Rs. 2000/-, each, on three occasions in between 3-4 P.M. on 14.08.2018 from Tata Indicash ATM situated at Narpur, Bachhwara Station road at that time, two boys were also present behind him. When the informant went to withdraw Rs. 40,000/- from Dularpur S.B.I. branch on 21.08.2018, then

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79402 of 2018(5) dt.03-05-2019 2/2 employee of the branch informed that the available balance in his account is Rs. 44/- only then he obtained statement of his account then came to know that Rs. 1,20,000/- is transferred from his account to account No. 32674159228 of Santosh Kumar (petitioner) and, similarly, Rs. 40,000/- is also transferred in account of Rajesh Kumar.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that while from the account of the informant Rs. 80,000/- were credited in the account of petitioner, but petitioner has no knowledge about transfer of said amount. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T