IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28165 of 2008 EKRAM ALI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 28.08.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Section 409, 467, 468, 471, 420/120 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he was in-charge of the Bihar Handloom Corporation, Patna. The allegation against him is to the effect that while handing over charge to the new incumbent, it was detected that there was a shortage of articles to the tune of Rs. 1,46,586.4/- and it was also detected that sum of Rs. 40,000/- approximately was misappropriated/defalcated by him on account of withdrawal of salary against two of its employees. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has handed over the charge which was taken over by the new incumbent. However, after a period of 1 month he informed the Managing Director of the corporation with regard to the above defalcation. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready to pay the defalcated amount in installments. Learned counsel for the State, on the other 2 hand, submits that the petitioner being the public servant is alleged to have misappropriated/defalcated with respect to the cloths entrusted to him and also made defalcation/misappropriation of the sum of Rs. 40,000/- approximately on account of the salary of its two employees. As such, petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 18.01.2001. Considering the nature of allegation and the facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail is rejected. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)