Yogeshwar Lal Das v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.66758 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2018 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai ====================================================== Yogeshwar Lal Das Son of Late Pashupati Lal Das, Resident of VillageBelahi, P.S.- Pandol, District- Madhubani, presently residing at Ward No. 12 Shivpuri, Chitkohra, P.S.- Phulwarisharif, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. State Of Bihar

2. Arvind Kr. Mishra, S/o Late Kapileshwar Mishra, District Manager Bihar State Food Corporation Begusarai, Permanent Address.- Vill P.O.- Paroriya, P.S.- Ujiyarpur, Distt.- Samastipur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Adv Mr.Rana Vikram Singh, Adv Mr. Rohit Raj, Adv For the State :

Mr. J.K.Singh,APP For the OP No.2 : Mr. Umesh Prasad, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 19-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 409, 420 IPC registered in connection with Begusarai (Lohianagar O.P.) P.S. Case No. 28 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the allegation that while handing over charge he did not deliver the relevant documents relating to godowns at Bazar Samiti 5 and Bazar Samiti 10 and has fled away in the backdrop of loss/defalcation of food grains to the tune of Rs.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.66758 of 2018(4) dt.19-02-2019 2/2 4,35,41,849.21. The allegation of theft of the said amount is against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner had duly handed over charge and delivered the concerned goods to the new incumbent who has accepted the same without any objection.

4. Learned counsel for the BSFC opposes the anticipatory bail petition submitting that there is direct allegation of theft against the petitioner and the petitioner has not disputed that the relevant documents relating to godowns at Bazar Samiti 5 and 10 were not handed over at the time of his transfer.

5. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Bail petition stands dismissed.

Chandran/- (Vikash Jain, J) U T