Monu Kumar @ Monu Kumar Tiwari vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 87 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31832 of 2020
   Arising Out of PS Case No.-563 Year-2019 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR TOWN District-
                                      Muzaffarpur
======================================================

Monu Kumar @ Monu Kumar Tiwari, aged about 32 years, Gender-Male, Son of Om Prakash Tiwari, Resident of Village-Fatahpur, Near-Hardi, P.S.- Paroo, District-Muzaffarpur, At present residing at Basant Bihar Colony Road No.1, Near Air Tell Tower, Kolhua, Paigambarpur, P.S.-Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s   :       Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate
For the State          :       Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 08-01-2021

Heard Mr. Bhola Prasad, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Town

PS Case No. 563 of 2019 dated 28.06.2019, instituted under

Sections 420/406/379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.The allegation against the petitioner is that he was the

Muzaffarpur Branch Manager of Gerc Logistics and despite the

company having sent goods of about rupees seven and a half lakhs

and 14 and a half lakhs, the same was not delivered to the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31832 of 2020 dt.08-01-2021

concerned customers and when the petitioner was called upon to

explain, he disappeared from the branch.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in

the FIR there is no description as to who has made complaint with

regard to non-receipt of goods and further as to whether the

informant who is the Regional Manager of the Company was

authorized to lodge the FIR. Learned counsel submitted that the

police have also not investigated as to whether the so-called goods

were received by the persons concerned and only on vague

allegation, he has been made accused and is also in custody since

18.05.2020.

5. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that

during investigation, the concerned traders have supported the

prosecution case stating that the petitioner was the person

responsible for non-delivery of their goods and further that other

traders had also faced similar situation due to the petitioner selling

their goods elsewhere for which they had raised claim from the

Company. Thus, learned APP submitted that the allegation in the

FIR has been corroborated by the victims.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31832 of 2020 dt.08-01-2021

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

8. However, the Court below shall expedite the trial.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

Anand Kr.

AFR/NAFR U T