Ram Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77686 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2024 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Ram Kumar Sah S/o- Shri Bal Krishna Sah Village- Bishnupur Titidha PSRajapakar, W.No-11, Phulhara Banu, District-Vaishali 2.

Amrita Suman W/o- Ram Kumar Sah Village- Bishnupur Titidha PSRajapakar, W.No-11, Phulhara Banu, District-Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda Regional Office, Muzaffarpur Region, Muzaffarpur Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the F.I.R., the named accused persons are said to have been found indulged in misappropriation of amount of Rs. 1.25 crore by committing illegal and fraudulent transaction in the Bank.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77686 of 2024(2) dt.20-11-2024 2/3 offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case due to grudge. The allegation leveled against the petitioners are not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner no.1 is a Clerk in Bank of Baroda whereas petitioner no.2 is the wife of the petitioner no.1 and she has been made accused only on the ground that she is the joint holder of the Bank account of the petitioner no.1. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as there is specific allegation against the petitioner no.1 to misappropriate an amount of Rs. 1.25 crore by committing illegal and fraudulent transaction in the Bank, therefore, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner no.1 is hereby rejected.

7. However, as there is no specific overt act against the petitioner no.2, let the above named petitioner no.2 , be released on bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77686 of 2024(2) dt.20-11-2024 3/3 satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No. 92 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

8. Accordingly, this application is partly allowed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Guddu/- U T