Aditya Sen v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40716 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2024 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Aditya Sen, S/o Ranjit Kumar Gupta, R/o Village- Bihpur, P.S.- Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-07-2025 Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, learned APP for the State.

2.The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 165 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 406, 409 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(D) and 66(C) of the Information and Technology Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was Loan Officer of the Spandana Sphoorty Financial Limited company which is registered under R.B.I. It is alleged that the petitioner has facilitated loan to lady customers by forging their credentials. It is alleged that the petitioner and the bank manager

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40716 of 2025(2) dt.25-07-2025 2/3 have embezzled altogether Rs. 5,12,041/-.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that the petitioner was a Loan Officer in the said company. His work was only to facilitate loan to the loanees. It has also been submitted that the documents which has been annexed with the F.I.R. which is the internal audit document which goes to show that loan to 59 customers was advanced on the recommendation of this petitioner but it also goes to show that disbursed amount was recollected. Despite that, in the column of fraud the same amount is entered. It is not clear as to how if the disbursed amount is recollected, how it can be termed as fraud. It has also been submitted that since it is a private concert, this false allegation has been made on the basis of firing him.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40716 of 2025(2) dt.25-07-2025 3/3 four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 165 of 2024, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Udakishunganj, District-Madhepura, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T