Anil Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28217 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -178 Year- 2016 Thana -EKMA District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Anil Ray, son of Shri Gautam Rai, Resident of Village- Beldari, Police Station- Daudpur, District- Saran at Chapra.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-07-2018 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Ekma P. S. Case No. 178 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons manufacturing forged passbooks and defalcated the amount of Rs. 5,78,000/- from the UCO Bank and the name of the petitioner surfaced on the basis of confession of co-accused, Manoj Kumar Yadav. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that only on the statement of co-accused there is nothing against him.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28217 of 2018 (3) dt.05-07-2018 2/2 Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that that the petitioner is master mind of the whole episode and for misappropriation of the money.

In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above and all materials available on the record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected with a direction to the petitioner that if the petitioner surrenders before the Court below and makes prayer for regular bail, which will be considered by the learned court below on its own merit without being prejudiced by order of this Court.

With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T