Dayanand Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80945 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1025 Year-2017 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== DAYANAND SHARMA S/O Late Devdut Sharma the then Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Janta Bazar Branch, District - Saran, at present R/O Mohalla - Acharya Narendra Dev Nagar, P.S.- Kotwali, Dist.- Faijabad (U.P.). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Rina Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 16-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 1025/2017 registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 406, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(r)(s) of ST/ST Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the Branch Manager of the Punjab National Bank and has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the complainant had withdrawn money by cheque, the main intention of the complainant to grab the bank money. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80945 of 2019(2) dt.16-12-2019 2/3 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in which this petitioner is said to be the Branch Manager of the Punjab National Bank and admittedly the complainant had opened a cash credit account and thereafter it is the case of the petitioner that the complainant had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- on 03.03.2016, Rs. 2,00,000/- on 11.03.2016 and then Rs.
3,13,500/- and thereafter the complainant did not start depositing installment to the Bank whereafter the inspection was carried out in the premises of the complainant and sensing that the complainant may fell in trouble he has lodged the present case making various allegations against the petitioner, in the nature of the allegations and the transactions which have been disclosed by the petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, let the above-named petitioner be enlarged on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Saran at Chapra, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1025/2017, Trial No. 2163/2019, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
i.e.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80945 of 2019(2) dt.16-12-2019 3/3 required;
(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T