IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31083 of 2008 SANTOSH KUMAR @ SANTOSH KUMAR GUPTA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 18.8.2008 Heard. It is a renewal prayer, the earlier prayer being rejected in Cr.Misc.Petition no.22870 of 2007. The case relates to a fraud of Rs.1.5 crore which was meant to the distributed among the farmers under the Crop Insurance Scheme through an Agency, M/S Agricultural Insurance Company India Ltd., Patna. There was an account held by the Agency in the UTI Bank Ltd and it worked probably with some franchise Bank at the Nodal Banks for different areas. It appears that a fraudulent Account was opened in the name of the Company in the ICICI Bank, Patna Main Branch, and that numbered as 6259.5.40993. The core allegation is fraudulent withdrawal from some of the Nodal Banks which complained to the Agency about the disappearance of the certain cheques and demand drafts which were subsequently found encashed through the above noted Account in the ICICI Bank and total fraud, as indicated above, was of Rs.1.5 crore. This petitioner, along with one Sanjay Kumar, is said to have encashed two cheques totaling up to Rs.8.5 lacs. The contention, as on the earlier occasions, is that the petitioner was an Agent having chosen the job as an extra curricular activity while prosecuting his studies for the Degrees of Master in 2 Computer Applications. The said Sanjay Kumar handed over a couple of cheques to the petitioner for encashment and the petitioner simply encashed and handed over the cash to said Sanjay Kumar. It was further submitted that a huge number of persons were engaged in the fraud and withdrawal of different amounts by virtue of encashment of missing cheques or drafts, the list of such persons along with the withdrawn amount has been filed as one of the annexures to the present petition at page 33 which runs up to page 37. The earlier rejection order assigns good and sound reasons based on the materials collected in the case diary, as may appear from the operative part of the order which discusses the material and the amounts which were fraudulently withdrawn from the Bank by encashing the missing cheques and demand drafts. The case appears serious and the amount involved is huge, considering which, the petition is dismissed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )