← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./35958/2016dismissed

Ram Swaroop Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

2016-10-27Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.35958 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4 Year- 2016 Thana -DALSINGHSARAI District- SAMASTIPUR ====================================================== Ram Swaroop Mahto son of Ramdeo Mahto resident of Village - Bulakipur, P.S. Dalsingsarai, Distt - Samastipur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Randhir Kumar No. 1, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Anita Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 27-10-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 04/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleged that he deposited the entire retiral benefit in his account no. 10640272461 and got his account transferred to State Bank (A.D.B) Dalsingsarai branch. On 15.12.2015 when the informant went to withdraw the money he found that his A.T.M. card was missing. When the account was updated it transpired that the entire money was withdrawn from his account and the money was credited in the account of Ram Swaroop Mahto (petitioner) holding account no.

00000020242591430. Money was twenty nine times credited in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35958 of 2016 (3) dt.27-10-2016 2/2 his account.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner have got no knowledge about the credit and withdrawal of the amount from his account. It was mischief of the bank officials.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that the account of the petitioner was credited twenty nine times after debiting the account of the informant and the entire amount was withdrawn from the account of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail.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