Allowed

Rakesh Kumar @ Appuji v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Jul 2022CR. MISC./8194/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a fraud case alleging misappropriation of pension amounts. The court found no primal connection based on the charge sheet and no ground for tampering with evidence despite investigation completion.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each subject to conditions of cooperation and presence.

Rakesh Kumar @ Appuji Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8194 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2021 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi

¶3

======================================================

¶4

RAKESH KUMAR @ APPUJI Son of Late Sushil Prasad Srivastava Resident of Village - Methaura, Bishanpur, P.S.- Dumra, Distt.- Sitamarhi.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶9

3 27-07-2022

¶10

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶11

petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶12

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period

¶13

of four weeks from today.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No. 252 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 20.12.2021.

¶16

The allegation against the petitioner is to commit cheating and to misappropriate the amount of Rs.400/- per month for the last five (5) years from the bank account of the mother of informant.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is operator of Customer Service Point

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8194 of 2022(3) dt.27-07-2022 2/3

¶19

(CSP) of SBI and for that reason, he has been falsely implicated on the basis of mere suspicion. It is also submitted that the contents of FIR is suggesting that alleged amount is withdrawn from the bank account of one Manisha Devi w/o Sukesh Ram but no any police complaint was ever lodged by said Manisha Devi w/o Sukesh Ram. It has further been submitted that nothing surfaced during course of investigation which may suggest that it was the petitioner who received any benefit out of said transactions. It is also submitted that petitioner could not transfer money to pension account, as responsibility is with Block Development Officer. It is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent, moreover, investigation has been completed, for which, charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶20

Learned APP, while opposing the prayer of bail, fairly conceded the fact that the transfer of pension amount is not the subject matter of operator of Customer Service Point(CSP).

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, as nothing surfaced during course of investigation, which may connect, prima facie , the petitioner with alleged transfer of amount or to receive any fiscal benefit arises thereof, coupled with the fact that charge-sheet has already been submitted, let

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8194 of 2022(3) dt.27-07-2022 3/3

¶23

the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No. 252 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M. Sitamarhi/concerned court, subject to the following conditions:

¶24

“(i) Accused/Petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be physically present on each and every date before the Trial Court till conclusion of the trial and exemption from physical appearance be allowed by the Trial Court, only on medical ground of the petitioner duly supported by the documents.

¶25

(ii) That one of the bailors shall be Lakshmi Sinha, who is the wife of the petitioner and deponent of the present bail petition.”

¶26

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶27

R.S.Sen/-

¶28

U T

Rakesh Kumar @ Appuji v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar @ Appuji v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharam Rabidas @ Dharma Rabidas Vs the State of Bihar

Nankhu Kahar @ Nanhaku Kahar Vs The State of Bihar

Baby Paswan @ Bobby Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Surya Sao @ Surydeo Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Prasad @ Muna Prasad Vs The State of Bihar