Sumeet Chakhaiyar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63198 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2018 Thana- DEO District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Sumeet Chakhaiyar, Son of Amar Kumar Chakhaiyar, Resident of Hanuman Nagar, P.S. Hanuman Nagar, District- Patna, present posted as A.G.M., B.S.F.C., Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

District Manager, State Food Corporation, Aurangabad. ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukund Jee, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P.

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-04-2019 Heard Sri Mukund Jee, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Parmeshwar Mehta, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the State Food Corporation.

The petitioner, who is named in the F.I.R. as accused in Aurangabad (DEO) P.S. Case No. 40 of 2018 registered long back on 13-04-2018 for offence under Sections 420/406/409 of the Indian Penal Code, has approached this Court for granting bail, in the event of his arrest of surrender.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63198 of 2018(9) dt.03-04-2019 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the Court that the petitioner has been victimized by the then Manager. He submits that no defalcation has taken place or any act was committed by the petitioner, still the petitioner, being Assistant Godown Manager, has been made accused. He further submits that another co-accused, namely Hitesh Kumar, who was service provider, has already been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for passing favourable order.

Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State Food Corporation, has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It was submitted by learned counsel for the State Food Corporation that Corporation has suffered loss of more than 13 crore rupees and in the present case, the petitioner is responsible for loss of more than 4 crore rupees. The case is in relation to Paddy/ CMR Scam.

Considering the fact that the petitioner has been arrayed as one of the F.I.R. named accused in the capacity of Assistant Godown Manager, I am of the opinion that no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63198 of 2018(9) dt.03-04-2019 3/3 indulgence can be granted by way of extending the privilege of anticipatory bail.

The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) nawalkrs/- U T