Patna High Court - Orders
Dipendra Kumar Tiwary vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 12 April, 2016
Author: Jitendra Mohan Sharma
Bench: Jitendra Mohan Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.971 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2015 Thana -ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR District-
PATNA
======================================================
1. Dipendra Kumar Tiwary son of Birendra Tiwary, resident of village -
Mahmadpur, Police Station- Manjhi, District- Saran (Chapra).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Economic Offences Unit, Patna.
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mr.V N P Sinha (For Eou)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN
SHARMA
ORAL ORDER
5 12-04-2016Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned senior counsel appearing for the Economic Offences Unit.
The petitioner wants to renew his prayer for bail which was earlier rejected by order dated 30.09.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 45223 of 2015 on the ground that now the investigation has already been completed and the petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2015, whereas, co-accused Sumit Kumar who was caught has already been allowed bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 40247 of 2015. The only allegation against the petitioner is that the ATM Card of the petitioner was recovered from the possession of co-accused Ranjeet Kumar who was arrested at the spot and amount of Rs. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.971 of 2016 (5) dt.12-04-2016 2/3 2,87,300/- was attempted to be withdrawn through the said account standing in the name of the petitioner.
Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is not the member of the gang, he has been dragged in this case by the co-accused but he has never deposited the fake cheque for withdrawing the amount rather he was made victim of the circumstances, the petitioner wanted to start business with one Amit Kumar and Amit Kumar persuaded the petitioner to open the account in his name but no business was started and the ATM Card and the pass-book were in possession of Amit Kumar and as there was nil balance in the said account the petitioner did not bother to collect the pass-book and the ATM Card and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration.
The learned senior counsel for the Economic offences Unit opposes prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner has given his ATM Card and the pass-book to the co-accused for withdrawing the fake cheques and he is also a member of the gang and further prayer for bail of co-accused Bipin Kumar @ Ashutosh Kumar @ Ashutosh @ Ashutosh Jha has also been rejected.
In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that investigation has already been completed, co- Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.971 of 2016 (5) dt.12-04-2016 3/3
accused Sumit Kumar has already been allowed bail by another coordinate Bench of this Court and as such the petitioner is also directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M. Patna in Economic Offences P.S. Case No. 002 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.
(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/-
U T