Patna High Court - Orders
Shiv Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 14 February, 2022
Author: Sandeep Kumar
Bench: Sandeep Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38807 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2020 Thana- WARISLIGANJ District- Nawada
======================================================
SHIV KUMAR S/o Late Sanjay Pandit R/o Village- Baghi Chakwae, P.S.-
Warisaliganj, District- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), LIC Building, Cannaught Place, New
Delhi. New Delhi
3. The Reserve Bank of India, Patna Bihar
4. The Economic Offences Unit (EOU) Bihar
5. Twitter India India
6. Youtube India India
7. WhatsApp, LLC India
8. Meta Platforms, Inc. India.
9. Google India India
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 22001 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-493 Year-2020 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda
======================================================
BACHAN KUMAR @ RAM BACHAN KUMAR SON OF KARU SAO
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- RASALPUR, POLICE STATION-
KATRISARAI, DISTRICT- NALANDA
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 43748 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2021 Thana- KASHICHAK District- Nawada
======================================================
RINKU SINGH @ DEEPAK KUMAR @ DEEPAK KUMAR RINKU S/o
Late Chotan Singh Resident of Village- Khakhri, P.S.- Town, Police Station-
Kashichak, District- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022
2/9
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 38807 of 2020)
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate
For the Union of India : Dr. K.N. Singh, Addl. Solicitor General
Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the R.B.I. : Mr. K.K. Jha, Senior Advocate
Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajay, G.A.-5
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
For JIO : Mr. Ratnakar Pandey, Advocate
For Airtel and Vodafone : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Intervenor : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate
Ms. Prakritita Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Manu Tripurari, Amicus Curaie
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 22001 of 2021)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 43748 of 2021)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kant, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
17 14-02-2022At the very outset, learned counsel for the Union of India submits that in the second last paragraph at page No. 4 of the order the dated 07.02.2022, in place of 'Department of Information and Broadcasting', it has wrongly been typed as 'Department of Telecommunications'.
In view of the above, let the 'Department of Telecommunications' be read as 'Department of Information and Broadcasting' in the second last paragraph at page No. 4 of the order the dated 07.02.2022.
The order dated 07.02.2022 is modified to the extent Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 3/9 as indicated above.
These matter has been heard through video conferencing.
Heard Mr. Shashi Anugrah Narayan assisted by Mr. Suresh Prassd Singh for the Punjab National Bank.
The interventions have not filed any affidavit replying to the affidavit of the Punjab National Bank. They are granted two weeks time by way of last chance to file their reply.
Matter with regard to S.B.I. Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Advocate, informed this court that he has filed an interlocutory application on behalf of Shri Rajeev Kumar Singh who has lost Rs. 11,94,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Ninety-Four thousand) from his bank account while he was in judicial custody and he has filed Rajeev Nagar P.S. Case No. 489 of 2021. He submits that around Rupees Nine Lakhs was kept in physical fixed deposit mode in the State Bank of India and as per the guideline of the State Bank of India, any amount which is in fixed deposit in physical mode cannot be encashed without presenting the instrument by the account holder.
Mr. Pushkar Narain Sahi assisted by Mr. Apurva Harsh for the State Bank of India have sought for three weeks Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 4/9 time to file counter affidavit to the interlocutory application.
Mr. Ajay, G.A.-5 appearing for the State has also sought three weeks time for filing counter affidavit in the aforesaid interlocutory application.
Considered the submissions of the parties. The State Bank of India and the State are granted two weeks time to file their counter affidavit in this case.
The State Bank of India is well advised that if the amount in question has been encashed without the deposit of physical instrument and there is a guideline with regard to the same of the State Bank of India that without depositing physical instrument, the amount cannot be encashed then it is expected that the State Bank of India in the intervening period of two weeks will return the amount in the bank account of the applicant.
Earlier, the interlocutory application was filed by Manindra Kishore Singh, Advocate, who has also lost Rupees Eight Lakhs kept in fixed deposit in Patna High Court State Bank of India Branch. In his case, the fixed deposit has been encashed without the presentation of the physical instrument. He has registered Kotwali P.S. Case No. 506/2020.
The S.B.I. will also reply to the encashment of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 5/9 fixed deposit of Shri Manindra Kishore Singh without the physical instrument being produced by the account holder.
Shri P.N. Sahi, learned Senior Advocate, will file a consolidated affidavit with regard to interlocutory application of Shri Rajeev Kumar and Shri Manindra Kishore Singh within two weeks.
The S.B.I. is directed to reply to the circular of the R.B.I. relied upon by Mr. Srivastava by the next date of hearing. It shall also bring before this Court as to what steps have been taken by them to inquire into the matter as soon as they got the information about the fraudulent transaction from the account of the customer/applicant, Mr. Verma.
Mr. P.N. Sahi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Apurva Harsh, Advocate, pray for and are granted two weeks time to file their counter affidavit.
Matter with regard to E.O.U Shri Vishwanath Prasad Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Smt. Soni Srivastava, Advocate, for the E.O.U. has submitted that the case of Manindra Kishore Singh was referred earlier to the E.O.U. and Rupees Fifty Thousand has been reversed in the bank account of Mr. Manindra Kishore Singh and Kotwali P.S. Case No. 506/2020 is being Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 6/9 investigated.
Mr. Ajay, G.A.-5, is directed to file the current status report in connection with Rajiv Nagar P.S. Case No. 217 of 2021. He is also directed to make specific statements as to what steps have been taken by the Investigating Officer.
Matter with regard to WhatsApp and Meta Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Varun Patkhak, Mr. Samir Ali Khan and Mr. Saket Tiwary appear for Meta and WhatsApp have submitted that they have filed their affidavit. This affidavit is to be served upon the Amicus Mr. Santosh Kumar and Mr. Mani Tripurari before the next date of hearing.
Put the issue of WhatsApp and Meta on 4th of March, 2022.
Matter with regard to Google LLC Mr. Amit Srivastava, learned Advocate, appearing for Google LLC submits that since he is appearing for Google LLC and Youtube is a part of Google LLC, therefore, Youtube may be deleted from the array of parties.
Office is directed to delete Youtube from the array of parties.
Mr. Srivastava submits that he was directed to co- Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 7/9 ordinate by way of E.O.U. and Google LLC for deletion of the five Urls. Now, those Urls have been removed.
Therefore, Mr. Srivastava may be freed from interacting between Google and E.O.U. It is directed that in future E.O.U. will interact with Google LLC directly and there is no need of informing Mr. Amit Srivastava.
Mr. Srivastava will also assist this Court on the next date on hearing i.e. on 04.03.2022 on the issue which is being heard by this Court with regard to removal of objectionable posts on various media platforms on behalf of the Google LLC.
Mr. Vishwanath Prasad Sinha, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Soni Srivastava submits that chargesheet has been submitted in E.O.U. Case No. 30 of 2021 by the E.O.U. on 11.02.2022 and he also submits that the prosecuting agency is ready to conduct speedy trial of the accused in the facts of the case when the entire judiciary was abused by the accused.
The E.O.U. is directed to inform this Court on the next date of hearing i.e., on 21st February, 2022 with regard to the chargesheet of E.O.U. P.S. Case No. 30 of 2021 as to whether the investigation has been closed against the accused Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 8/9 Dinesh or further investigation is still pending against him.
The report along with photostat copy of the case diary and chargesheet should be produced in the Court on 21.02.2022 in a sealed cover.
If further investigation is pending against accused Dinesh then this Court will pass necessary orders about the speedy trial of the accused Dinesh taking into account whether the speedy trial is to begin now and be concluded within three months or await the report of further investigation.
Mr. Binod Kumar Agrawal, Additional Director, Investigation, Patna along with Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha appears for the Income Tax Department. Shri Daulat Kumar, Deputy Director along with Mr. K.N. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, appear for the Enforcement Directorate and all of them have agreed that they will have a joint virtual meeting on 17th of this month for sharing information and, thereafter, act in accordance with Income Tax and P.M.L. Act against the cyber criminals.
Re. Cr. Misc. No. 43748 of 2021 (Rinku Singh Vs. State of Bihar) Mr. Ajay, learned G.A.-5, has submitted a report of the Superintendent of Police, Nawada from which it appears Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38807 of 2020(17) dt.14-02-2022 9/9 that the concerned Magistrate dealing with Kashichak Police Station has not issued warrant of arrest as prayed by Investigating Officer of Kashichak P.S. Case No. 101/2021. The application for issuance of non-bailable warrant was filed on 21.09.2021.
It is surprising that the Magistrate has failed to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest in this case.
The District Judge, Nawada is asked for a show-cause from the concerned Magistrate and submit the same within a week from receipt of a copy of the order.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the District Judge, Nawada, through FAX/e-mail forthwith.
Put up this case on 21.02.2022 along with other connected matters.
Re. Cr. Misc. No. 22001 of 2021 (Bachan Kumar Vs. State of Bihar) Put up this case on 21.02.2022 along with other connected matters.
(Sandeep Kumar, J) Saif/-
U T