Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65534 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-583 Year-2023 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui ====================================================== Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Yadav Son of Sukdev Yadav Resident of Village - Sono, P.S. - Sono, District - Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Priti Kumari The Manager,South Bihar Gramin Bank Branch Address- TolaBarmasiya, Jhajha Dist- Jamui ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey,Adv. For OP-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Jhajha P.S. Case No. 583 of 2023, registered for offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per F.I.R., the allegation against petitioner is that he misappropriated FD receipts and cheques from South Bihar Gramin Bank and cheated bank customers by fraudulently withdrawing money from their bank accounts and also of taking cash in the name of fixed deposit, but did not deposit the same in the bank.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65534 of 2024(10) dt.23-07-2025 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. At the relevant time, petitioner was working as temporary Safai Karmi in the bank and informant wanted to remove him from job and therefore, this false and concocted case has been lodged. Petitioner was working in the bank since March, 2016, but there was no complaint against him. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. However, learned counsel for the bank vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific allegation that he, while functioning as Safai Karmi, misappropriated FD receips and cheques of the bank and also fraudulently withdrew money of bank customers.
6. Considering the nature of accusation, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T