Shantanu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85475 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-632 Year-2023 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Shantanu Singh Son of Subodh Kumar Singh Resident of M-G Marg, near Laxmi Talkies Khagaria, P.S. - Khagaria, Dist. - Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bank of India through its Manager, Awadh Complex Rajendra Chouk, Khagaria, P.S. + District Khagaria ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Sri Vindhya Keshri Kumar, Sr. Advocate Sri Neeraj Kumar Alias Sanidh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Bank :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2026
1. Heard Sri Vindhya Keshri Kumar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner is Shantanu Singh and is son of Subodh Kumar Singh. It is next submitted that the said submission has been made, at the outset, since it has relevance on the adjudication of the instant case. It is also submitted that in sum and substance, the allegation is that fraudulently from
2/5 the account of D.D.C., Khagaria an amount of Rs.51,67,220/- was withdrawn through 11 cheques and credited in the account no. 462410110003610 of Shantanu Kumar and Shantanu Kumar withdrew an amount of Rs.50,90,000/- in cash through 13 transactions. Further, an amount of Rs.24 Lakhs was withdrawn from the account of Shantanu Kumar in between 28.01.2022 to 11.02.2022.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that it is not in dispute that the money came to be credited in the account of the petitioner, i.e., Shantanu Singh but then the said account lastly was operated by Shantanu Singh on 17.04.2013 and an amount of Rs.300/- was withdrawn. It is next submitted that thereafter the account was never operated by Shantanu Singh and the account became a dormant account. It is also submitted that subsequently when the FIR came to be instituted, it bore an allegation that the account was of Shantanu Kumar, son of Ram Prakash Thakur. It is further submitted that it appears that since the account was lying dormant, as such, someone misused the account by changing the name of Shantanu Singh to Shantanu Kumar. It is next submitted that during the course of
3/5 investigation, it also transpired that one Brajesh Kumar being Clerk in the Bank of India, Khagaria Branch came to be implicated with an allegation that Brajesh Kumar through his finacle ID revived the dormant account of Shantanu Kumar and thereafter removed the lien from the account of Shantanu Kumar, also changed the name of Shantanu Singh to Shantanu Kumar and thereafter visited Alauli Branch of the bank on 15.11.2022 and 23.11.2022 i.e. the date on which the account is alleged to have been withdrawn. Further, on 05.03.2023, he opened the branch of the bank unauthorizedly despite the day being a holiday i.e. Sunday. Further, an amount of Rs.46 lakhs was credited in the joint account of Brajesh Kumar with his mother.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, thus, submits that the said facts stand recorded in the order dated 14.02.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 67908 of 2024 (Brajesh Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar). It is further submitted that Brajesh Kumar was granted the privilege of regular bail. It is next submitted that investigation in the case is continuing and petitioner will not abscond, rather will cooperate in the investigation if the privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to him. It is reiterated and submitted, at the outset, that the name of the petitioner and
4/5 his father's name was submitted only to bring to the notice of the Court that the allegation of withdrawal of the amount credited in the account of the petitioner was in the name of Shantanu Kumar and not Shantanu Singh and even the father name was not matching.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank are not able to rebut the said submissions of the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Khagaria P.S. Case No. 632 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. However, it is made clear that if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that the petitioner, despite giving
5/5 assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the investigation, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T