Hari Prakash v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71441 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-579 Year-2022 Thana- RAMNAGAR District- West Champaran ====================================================== HARI PRAKASH S/O RAM SURAT RAM R/O VILL-SAHPUR PATTI, PSDEORIYA(ORIGINALLY SAHEBGANJ), DIST-MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Atul Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2024
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Ram Nagar Police Station Case No. 579 of 2022, dated 11.12.2022, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 379/406/420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the petitioner is the cashier of Bharat Financial Infusion Limited, Ramnagar Branch. It has been alleged that in the night, at about 01 AM, on 07.12.2022, when all the staffs of Bharat Financial Infusion Limited, including the petitioner, were sleeping, the petitioner fled away with Rs. 5,98,204/-, which was collected by the Field Officers of the Bharat Financial Infusion Limited.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71441 of 2023(4) dt.19-03-2024 2/2 petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case inasmuch as there is no receipt to show that the petitioner had taken Rs. 5,98,204/-. He further submits that the petitioner was working in Bharat Financial Infusion Limited on a monthly remuneration of Rs. 5200/- but when the authorities of the Bharat Financial Infusion Limited did not pay him the salary of 3 to 4 month, he left the job and the petitioner has been implicated in this case due to the conspiracy by the Branch Manager of the Bharat Financial Infusion Limited.
5. From perusal of the First Information Report as well as the case diary, it appears that the petitioner was the Cashier of Bharat Financial Infusion Limited and the witnesses have supported the allegation made in the First Information Report.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √