Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Raj Narain Pandey v. State Of U.P - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 11155 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2908 (15 September 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 11155 of 2005

Raj Narain Pandey...Vs....... State of U.P.

Hon'ble Ravindra Singh, J.

Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava and Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava  learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and Sri Manish Tiwari learned counsel for the complainant.

This application is filed by the applicant Raj Narain Pandey with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 76 of 2005, under Sections 409, 406, 419, 420, 467 and 468 I. P.C., P.S. Maduadeeh,   district Varanasi.

From the perusal of the record it reveals that in the present case F.I.R. was lodged by Dr. S.P. Singh, Senior Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Maduadeeh Branch, Varanasi on 22.3.2005 at 7.20 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 21.3.2005.

According to the prosecution version on 21.3.2005 the first informant was on Casual Leave. He got information through Smt Vimlesh Kumari at 9.20 p.m. that the deposited amount received by the applicant being Head Cashier was not tallying with the record and there was shortage of Rs. 21,10,931.44 p and the same amount has been misappropriated by him.  

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in good faith the applicant has issued the receipts of some amounts to the businessmen. In fact that amount was not deposited by them. That is why there was shortage in total amount received by the applicant. It is further contended that the banks itself is not coming with a clean stand that the amount was deposited by the customers, but the same has been misappropriated. It is


further contended that the applicant has not misappropriated any amount, but there is  some mistake in calculation and issuing of the receipt. The applicant is in jail since 22.3.2005.

It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant by submitting that the applicant is only person who has accepted the amount from the depositors and after accepting the same he has issued the receipts also. At this stage the plea taken by the learned counsel for the applicant that in good faith the receipts were issued without receiving the alleged deposited money, cannot be accepted or if it is accepted even then there is misappropriation of the amount because the applicant has shown the deposits of the aforesaid amount in the bank account.  

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case,  submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant, it will not be proper to express any opinion on the merits of the case, the pleas taken by the learned counsel for the applicant shall be considered by the trial court when the evidence will be adduced. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail at this stage.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected at this stage.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.