Amit Kumar Dubey vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1423 Patna

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31989 of 2020
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2019 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna
  ======================================================

Amit Kumar Dubey (M), aged about 33 years, son of Late Krishanandan Hiraman Dubey @ Krishanandan Dubey, resident of Maheshwari Colony near Biskoman Colony, Gulzarbag, Police Station - Alamganj, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

  For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate
  For the State           :        Ms. Sharda Kumari, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 12-03-2021

Heard Mr. Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Ms. Sharda Kumari, learned Additional Public

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

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Malsalami PS Case No. 426 of 2019 dated 16.11.2019,

instituted under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that there

was huge shortfall in the godown of which he was in-charge

amounting to almost rupees twenty-three lakhs.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he

was not the only person in-charge of the PACS where there was

shortfall. It was further submitted that prior to the present case

he has filed a complaint case against the informant and others Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31989 of 2020 dt.12-03-2021

wherein, grievance is that they were somehow trying to remove

him from service. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner

has no criminal antecedent. It was further submitted that the

allegation in the FIR is that the incident took place on

05.07.2019, whereas, the FIR has been lodged on 16.11.2019

i.e., after four months, for which there is no explanation.

5. Learned APP submitted that there is specific

allegation of there being shortfall of goods worth almost rupees

twenty-three lakhs. It was submitted that the petitioner was in-

charge of the godown and, thus, he has to take responsibility as

he had not made any complain with regard to any shortfall of

articles. It was further submitted that the informatory petition by

the petitioner has no relevance in the present matter as it is with

regard to grievance relating to there being conspiracy to remove

him from his job. Learned APP further submitted that there is no

delay as the shortfall was detected at the time of filing of the

FIR and it was the petitioner, who was the in-charge of the

godown and, thus, what has been done by the informant, was

upon verification of the godown, when the shortfall came to the

notice of the informant and the company.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31989 of 2020 dt.12-03-2021

Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

J. Alam/-

AFR/NAFR U T