IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20816 of 2009 DAYANAND RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 29.07.2009 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under Sections 379/34 of Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is A.T.M. Guard. It is alleged that the informant went to withdraw money. He was standing outside and laughing. Informant made attempt to withdraw the money but the amount was not withdrawn. She again withdrew the amount and it was found that on the previous evening, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was withdrawn from her account at the said A.T.M. Learned counsel submits the default in the A.T.M. machine is well known. The informant has not received the money. The bank will look into the same, if found correct, she may be compensated by re-depositing the amount in her account. Learned counsel, referring to the F.I.R. submits that there is no allegation that this petitioner withdrew the amount from the said account. In the facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M., Danapur (Patna) in connection with Danapur P.S. case no. 128 of 2009. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. ) 2