[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Hare Krihna Adak vs The Central Bureau Of Investigation … on 5 August, 2025
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20315 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2018 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna
======================================================
Hare Krihna Adak Son of Late Abinash Chandra Adak R/o Village - Jatimati,
P.O.- New Township Digha, P.S.- Digha, Distt.- Purb Medinipur, West Bengal
- 711301.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.), Patna Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate
For the C.B.I : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Ankit Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 05-08-2025
Heard Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the Central Bureau of Investigation.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with FIR No.12/S/18 arising out of Kotwali
(Bhagalpur) P.S. Case No.650 of 2017 for the offences
punishable under Sections 34, 120B, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468
and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the First Information Report, it is alleged that
there is illegal transfer and misuse of funds from Government
Bank accounts in Bhagalpur, Bihar in fraudulent and
conspiratorial manner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20315 of 2025(4) dt.05-08-2025
2/6
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The present FIR is instituted in 2017 and the same
was transferred to CBI and accordingly case was registered as
RC 12/S/2018 on 16.08.2018 against the then Branch Managers
of Bank of Baroda, Bhagalpur, along with the officers bearers of
Srijan Mahila Vikash Sahyog Samiti Ltd., Sabaur and others.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that CBI
after investigation submitted chargesheet bearing No.27/2019
dated 30.12.2019 against accused persons namely, Sant Kumar
Sinha, Nabin Kumar Saha and Sarita Jha. The petitioner name
was not figured in the aforesaid chargesheet and his name
transpired in the supplementary chargesheet filed by the
investigating officer more than five years of lodging of the
present FIR. From perusal of the supplementary charge sheet, it
is evident that the petitioner’s name appears in the paragraph
no.xix. The allegation in the chargesheet is that the petitioner in
the capacity of a checker, passed a cheque bearing No.042289 of
Rs. 1,21,80,000/-(Rupees One Crore Twenty One Lakh Eighty
Thousand) issued by DDC, Bhagalpur in favour of Srijan.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner in the capacity of maker and checker, passed cheques
bearing No. 141024 for Rs. 84,51,700/- ( Rupees Eighty
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20315 of 2025(4) dt.05-08-2025
3/6
Four Lakh Fifty One Thousand Seven Hundred) and bearing
No.333010 of Rs.28,20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh
Twenty Thousand) issued by DDC, Bhagalpur in favour of
Srijan. The petitioner has been charges under Section 120B, 409
and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section 13(2)
read with Section 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
during investigation, it was found that a total of
Rs.5,62,21,313/-(Rupees Five Crore Sixty Two Lakh Twenty
One Thousand Three Hundred Thirteen) was deposited from
unknown sources, while Rs. 5,58,83,263(Five Crore Fifty Eight
Lakh Eighty Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Three) was
withdrawn, leaving an excess deposit of Rs. 3,38,083(Three
Crore Thrity Eight Lakh Eight Three) in the informant’s
account.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not named in the FIR. He has fully cooperated
with the investigating agency, making himself available. It is
clear from the aforesaid that custodial interrogation of the
petitioner is not required in the present case. The petitioner is
retired personnel of about 68 years old and he has performed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20315 of 2025(4) dt.05-08-2025
4/6
official duty in accordance with bank’s regulations, verifying the
cheques in question based on the accompanying deposit slips
and this case does not involve embezzlement of public funds.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon
the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mahdoom Bava vs.
CBI, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 299 and Hon’ble Apex
has observed that “If an accused had not been arrested during
the investigation, it is difficult to accept that the custody of an
accused at a later stage would be required.”
10. He further submits that modus operandi of the
entire srijan cases as alleged is almost the same and allegation
against the government officials is of non-discharge their duties
and it appears from the aforesaid that the petitioner is not
beneficiary of the present transaction and the similarly situated
co-accused persons, namely, Nand Kishore Malviya, Banshidhar
Jha and Dinkar Tigga have been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.08.2024,
27.09.2024, 30.01.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 8070 of 2024, Cr.
Misc. No. 61232 of 2024 and Cr.Misc No. 77149 of 2024.
11. Learned counsel for the CBI has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the
supplementary chargesheet was filed against the petitioner on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20315 of 2025(4) dt.05-08-2025
5/6
28.06.2023 and during investigation it was revealed that the
petitioner was the then Assistant Manager, Indian Bank
Bhagalpur Branch was chequer and the petitioner has verified
the cheque which was issued in the favour of the BDO and later
on the same was credited in the account of srijan. He further
submits that petitioner carries eleven criminal antecedents.
12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties,
perused the records and considering the aforesaid judgment and
the fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have been
granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court, let the
petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the court below within a period of thirty days from the
date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special
Judge, CBI-II, Patna in connection with RC No.12/S/18, giving
rise to Spl.Case No.08/2023 arising out of Kotwali (Bhagalpur)
P.S. Case No. 650 of 2027, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure /
Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and
with other following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20315 of 2025(4) dt.05-08-2025
6/6properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link