Josim Shaikh Son Of Taserul Shaikh @ … vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 April, 2025

Jharkhand High Court

Josim Shaikh Son Of Taserul Shaikh @ … vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 April, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

                                                                                      2025:JHHC:11726




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                A.B.A. No. 3433 of 2024
                                          ----
                   Josim Shaikh son of Taserul Shaikh @ Mahbul Shaikh, resident
                   Village Sirajpur, P.O. Makdampur, P.S. Maheshpur, District Pakur,
                   Jharkhand.
                                                                    ...        Petitioner
                                           -versus-
                   1. The State of Jharkhand
                   2. Nand Kishore Rawat S/o Rama Kant Rawat, R/o at present
                   Bharat    Financial    Inclusion     Limited,    Maheshpur,          PO      PS
                   Maheshpur, Dist. Pakur, Jharkhand, R/o Permanent Kumar Para,
                   Jirwabari, PO PS Jirwabari, Dist. Dumka, Jharkhand.
                                                              ...     Opposite Parties
                                              ----
                            CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
                                        ----
                   For the Petitioner :       Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate

                   For the Opp. Parties:      Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P.
                                              ----

                                         ORDER

6/ 21.04.2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the
State had argued their case at length on the last date and on conclusion of
argument, the case was fixed for today under the heading “For Orders”.

2. Through this anticipatory bail application, the petitioner,
apprehending his arrest in connection with Maheshpur Police Station Case
No.29 of 2024 for allegedly committing offences under Sections 406, 420, 409,
467, 471, 465, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Pakur, has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended that the
petitioner is quite innocent and the allegations by the prosecution are false and
baseless. He argued that no specific allegation or any specific role played by
the petitioner in the entire offence has been brought in by the complainant/
informant. He further submitted that the allegations in this case revolve around
financial transactions and even if the allegations are taken to be true, there is

-: 1 :-
A.B.A. No. 3433 of 2024
2025:JHHC:11726

no specific allegation against the petitioner indicating his involvement in the
alleged financial transactions.

4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State argued that in course of
investigation witnesses have stated that the petitioner had also obtained finger
prints from them and was instrumental in fraudulent financial transactions and
embezzlement of huge amount. He specifically referred to the statement of
witnesses recorded in course of investigation at paragraph 6, and paragraphs
36 to paragraph 40 of the case diary.

5. A complaint was filed by the complainant/informant, who is the
Branch Manager of Bharat Financial Inclusion Ltd., Maheshpur Branch.
Subsequently, on directions of the Court below in terms of Section 156(3) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, a First Information Report being Maheshpur
Police Station Case No.29 of 2024 was registered for offences under Sections
420, 406, 409, 467, 471, 465, 468 of the Indian Penal Code. In the complaint
petition, it was alleged by the complainant/informant that the accused Nos.1
and 2, who were employees of the Company and accused No.3 and accused
No.4 (petitioner herein) who were C. Operators of the Company, on the pretext
of Aadhar Update, obtained finger prints of members and fraudulently
withdrawn money several times and embezzled the same. The complainant
has also narrated specific instances in the complaint petition and has alleged
that the accused persons have embezzled an amount to the tune of
Rs.43,67,321/- (Rupees Forty Three Lakh Sixty Seven Thousand Three
Hundred Twenty One).

6. Considering the rival submissions and the allegations, I have gone
through the case diary. From the statement of witnesses at paragraph 6 and
paragraphs 36 to 40 of the case diary, it appears that the Assistant Branch
Manager of the Company has stated that the petitioner along with other co-
accused had left the centre meeting and on enquiry it could be found that the
four accused, including the petitioner, have fled after defrauding Rs.43,67,321/-
It has also been stated that the accused persons have fled even from their
home and village and not responding to the phone calls being made. Similarly,
the individual victims of such fraud, whose statements are at paragraphs 36 to
40 of the case diary, have all in similar manner stated that the petitioner along
with co-accused Sandeep and Nafis had obtained their finger prints and thus,
additional amounts are shown as loan dues against their names. This petitioner

-: 2 :-
A.B.A. No. 3433 of 2024
2025:JHHC:11726

has misappropriated huge money and has caused loss to the company and the
people who were members.

7. Considering the nature of allegations and also in view of the
materials that have transpired in course of investigation, I find that this is not a
fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner in connection with in connection with
Maheshpur Police Station Case No.29 of 2024, pending in the Court of the
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pakur, is hereby rejected.

8. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-03

-: 3 :-
A.B.A. No. 3433 of 2024