The High Court of Judicature at Patna, in an oral order, rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a criminal case involving cheating and forgery. The court held that no new grounds had come on record to reconsider the earlier rejection of the bail prayer.
Prayer for the grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46298 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2011 Thana- BIND District- Nalanda
======================================================
Avinash Kumar @ Abhinash Kumar Son of Shree Niwash Sharma Resident of Village - Katru Bigha, P.S. - Parwalpur, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr.Gaurav Govind, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
Petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Bind P.S. Case No. 67 of 2011 for the offences punishable under sections 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had earlier filed Cr. Misc. No. 13443 of 2012 for grant of Anticipatory Bail which was rejected vide order dated 19.7.2012. The petitioner then renewed prayer for Anticipatory Bail by filing Cr. Misc. bearing token no. 87940 of 2015 but due to some defect the Cr. Misc. no. was not generated.
Accusation against the petitioner is that being agent of Aviva Life Insurance who was acquaintance with the pass word of the employees of the bank and by misusing the pass word, he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46298 of 2021(2) dt.25-03-2022 2/2
has transferred Rs. 1,32,000/- from the different accounts.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner being agent of the insurance company was supposed to know the password, hence the Branch Manager, in order to shift his burden, has made accused to the petitioner.
Considering the nature of accusation and the fact that no new ground has come on record, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
Ravi/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving offences under sections 420, 467, and 468 IPC given no new grounds have emerged.
Whether the accusation of misusing a bank employee's password to transfer funds warrants grant of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Avinash Kumar @ Abhinash Kumar
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
