Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38848/2018dismissed

Kumar Ravi Prakash v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2018-09-11Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38848 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -132 Year- 2017 Thana -ISLAMPUR District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) ======================================================

1. Kumar Ravi Prakash Son of Kumar Ranjit Sinha, resident of VillageEkangarsarai, P.S.- Ekangarsarai, District- Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Branch In Charge, Nalanda Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Ishlampur, District- Nalanda.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, Adv. For the Informant : Mr. Bindhyanchal Rai, Adv.

For the State : Mr. Sri Sakir Ahmad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-09-2018 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 132 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner, who was engaged for updating the software of the computer, is of defalcation of money in the Bank, as the persons deposited money in their Account, but less deposit has been shown in the Account.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has worked in the Bank only for the period from 16.06.2013 to 01.09.2016 and those transactions is not of that period and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38848 of 2018 (3) dt.11-09-2018 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant, they have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stating that some persons were issued receipt against depositing the amount but the amount has not been deposited in their Account or lesser amount has been deposited and also in the wrong way the depositing and withdrawal has been shown. Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner rather he should surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail, which would be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by order of this Court.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/Amjad/- U T