← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53203/2025bail rejected

Gaurang v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-21Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53203 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2015 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna ====================================================== Gaurang Son of Akhilesh Chaudhary R/O Village- Chak Barkurwa, P.S.- Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prashant Saurabh, Adv., Mr. Aman Raj, Adv. and Mr. Jasjit Pranjal, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 257 of 2015, registered for offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that this petitioner used to collect the outstanding amount of the bank from the borrower in the Patna office of Hi-Tek Syndicate and after issuing receipt used to deposit the outstanding amount to the bank, but suddenly the petitioner reported to his office that the official receipt book had been lost and he accordingly lodged a Sanha at the concerned police station. It is further alleged that after two days, the office came to know from its reliable source

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53203 of 2025(2) dt.21-08-2025 2/2 that some unknown persons are fraudulently collecting money from the borrowers by misusing pages from the lost receipt book and issuing forged receipts and when in this regard, the office tried to contact petitioner, he was not found.

4. Considering the nature of accusation and the fact that F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2015 and petitioner has moved this application for grant of anticipatory bail after a lapse of 10 years, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T