Monti Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66675 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2023 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Monti Kumar S/o- Manoj Singh resident of Village- Banta Rampur Mananpur PS-Lakhisarai, Dist- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Md Harun Quareshi , Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP For informant :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar , Advocate Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and the State .
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 463 , 468 , 467, and 384 of the IPC .
3 . As per the prosecution case , petitioner while working in the shop of informant is alleged to have misappropriated the money of the informant and caused loss to him. It is further alleged that when informant tallied the entire
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66675 of 2024(3) dt.07-01-2025 2/3 balance , he found that goods of worth Rs. 5300990/- were sent to 81 traders and only Rs. 3088715/- was received from them and a total of Rs. 2212545/- was outstanding from the traders and when petitioner was asked about the same he told to the informant that traders will make the payment gradually . After that on 24.06.2022 the petitioner stopped coming to the shop .
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity and village politics. It is further submitted that petitioner is only labour and he has purchased a Toto and the said toto was given to the informant for transporting electric goods and Rs. 800 per day was given to the petitioner and the labour cost of the petitioner is Rs. 1100/- per month but informant could not pay the same and when petitioner demanded his money , then informant lodged this false and concocted case against this petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he along with other co-accused persons collected Rs. 5300990/- and only Rs. 3088715/- was received from informant's traders and a total of Rs. 2212545/- was misappropriated by this petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66675 of 2024(3) dt.07-01-2025 3/3
6. Considering the nature of accusation and other circumstances of the case , prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T