Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15711/2016rejected

Kameshwar Chaubey v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-16Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15711 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -46 Year- 2015 Thana -DAWATH District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Kameshwar Chaubey Son of Late Gopal Chaubey, Resident of VillageSemari, P.S.-Dawath, District-Rohtas at Sasaram. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ambuj Nayan Chaubey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Pd. Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 16-08-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Dawath P.S. Case No. 46/2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner was Chairman of Semari Packs of Dawath Block. During tenure of the petitioner a Jamavriddhi Yojana (banking scheme) was started. Binod Dubey was the Assistant Manager of the bank. It is alleged that the petitioner and Binod Dubey committed illegality by which about Rs. 83,00,000/-, which was deposited by different depositors, was misused. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was the Chairman of the Packs. Petitioner lost the election and thereafter Satendra Singh was the elected Chairman of Semari

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15711 of 2016 (5) dt.16-08-2016 2/2 Packs of Dawath Block. He stopped the banking scheme among the members of the packs. The entire amount of the scheme was audited. The Auditor pointed out lapses and found Chief Assistant-cum-Manager-cum-Cashier was responsible, but on the face of it appears that petitioner was the Chairman at that time and he started Jamavridhi Scheme, in which members deposited Rs. 83,00,000/-, but the Chairman and Manager invested properly Rs. 2,79,809.20 in P.N.B., S.B.I and I.D.B.I. and rest of the amount was misappropriated. It further appears that in the chest of bank only Rs. 26,00,000/- was found. The petitioner and other officials of the bank are alleged to have misappropriated more than Rs. 56,00,000/-.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T