Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.21439 of 2012 ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Jha, son of Late Nirmal Chandra Jha, resident of Mohalla- Gautam Nagar, Gangjala, Saharsa, P.S.+District-Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 11-06-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with a case instituted under [STATUTE] . It is stated that though the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place in 2008, the F.I.R. was instituted after four years in 2012. It is further contended that nothing has been defalcated in the present case. As a matter of fact, the draft in question was issued due to mistake and transactional error. The moment, the petitioner realized about the inadvertent issuance of the draft, he immediately deposited the amount in question on 6.2.2008 and 11.2.2008. It is also stated that the petitioner has since retired and has got no criminal antecedent. Be that as it may, considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order be released on Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21439 of 2012 (2) dt.11-06-2012 2 / 2 2 bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in connection with Bihra P.S. Case No. 3 of 2012 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. and also on the following conditions: (i) That both the bailors will be close relative of the petitioner who will give separate affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner. (ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority. (iii) That he shall remain present before the court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If he wants to remain absent, then he shall take prior permission of the court and in case of compelling and unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, he will immediately inform the court and request that he may be permitted to be present through the counsel. (iv) That liberty is given to the State to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioner violates any of the conditions imposed by this Court. Sanjeet/- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 408

Statute Text:
Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal breach of trust by a clerk or servant. Whoever, being a clerk or servant or employed as a clerk or servant, and being in any manner entrusted in such capacity with property, or with any dominion over property, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.