Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38797/2024dismissed

Chaudhary Sanjay Kumar Ramakant @ Chaudhari Sanjay Kumar Ramakant v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-20Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38797 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-582 Year-2023 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Chaudhary Sanjay Kumar Ramakant @ Chaudhari Sanjay Kumar Ramakant Son of Late Ramakant Yadav then Branch Manager, The Gopalganj Central Co-operative Bank, Limited, Branch- Bhore, Gopalganj. R/O Ahiyarpur, P.S.- Vijaeepur, Dist.- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Prem Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, 469 and 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in connection with Bhore P.S.Case No. 582 of 2023.

3. The informant of this case is the Branch Manger of the Gopalganj Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. The accused/petitioner was the Branch Manager of the Bank in question at the relevant time. According to allegation, the petitioner along with two bank employees misappropriated Rs.2,98,75,135/- and deposited the said amount in the bank account of 12 persons without any authority. It was detected

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38797 of 2024(13) dt.20-08-2025 2/2 during investigation that out of the misappropriated amount, 1,86,00, 000/- was deposited in the bank account of the wife of the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that out of the alleged misappropriated amount, the petitioner has deposited a considerable amount and the remaining amount shall also be deposited, if some time is given to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Central Co-operative Bank, has submitted that the petitioner issued a cheque of Rs. 50,00,000/- in favour of the Bank, which was dishonoured.

6. In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail which is hereby rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T