Dismissed

Ram Chandra Choudhary @ Ram Chandra Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Jan 2023CR. MISC./57482/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail filed by a Panchayat Secretary allegedly accused of embezzling ₹20.6 lakhs under IPC sections 406, 409, 419, and 420. The court found the nature of the allegation regarding government fund embezzlement adverse to the petitioner, dismissing the pleas of innocence and lack of antecedents.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner is rejected and the application is dismissed.

Ram Chandra Choudhary @ Ram Chandra Chaudhary Vs The State of… — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57482 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2022 Thana- BEERPUR District- Begusarai

¶3

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

¶4

RAM CHANDRA CHOUDHARY @ RAM CHANDRA CHAUDHARY S/o Shri Ramakant Choudhary Resident of Ward No. 18, Matihani, P.S.Matihani, District- Begusarai, Presently Panchayat Secretary, Bhawanandpur Gram Panchayat, Block- Birpur, Begusarai

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 03-01-2023

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Birpur P.S. Case No.75 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable u/s 406, 409, 419 and 420 of the IPC.

¶14

Allegedly, the petitioner is said to have withdrawn Rs.20,60,354/- received for the financial year 2021-22 in the office of Gram Panchayat, Bhawanandpur without initiation of execution of plan/work, thereby causing embezzlement of the Government fund.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57482 of 2022(2) dt.03-01-2023 2/2

¶17

presumption. No embezzlement in execution of scheme/plan has been committed by the petitioner. It is further submitted that out of the schemes/plan, five plans have already been executed by the petitioner and only one plan has to be executed. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶18

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the allegation is of embezzlement of Government fund specific upon the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

¶20

This application is accordingly dismissed.

¶21

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶22

pallavi/-

¶23

U T

Ram Chandra Choudhary @ Ram Chandra Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Chandra Choudhary @ Ram Chandra Chaudhary 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

Priya Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Niranjan Pandit Vs The State of Bihar

Ritu Devi @ Nitu Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Upendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Chumman Chaudhary @ Chuman Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Hemlata Kumari Vs the State of Bihar