IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4495 of 2009 PAWAN KUMAR MISHRA S/O RAJENDRA PRASAD JHA, R/O RAJIGANJ, RANIPATRA, P.S. SADAR, DIST. PURNEA. -- PETITIONER Versus STATE OF BIHAR --- OPP. PARTY. ----------- For the petitioner: Md. Bahauddin, Advocate. For the State: Mr. C.Jawahar, APP. 02. 01.05.2009 Heard both sides. The sole petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case instituted under Sections 420 and 408 of the Penal Code. As per allegations contained in the complaint, petitioner was the employee of the complainant and was assigned the job of collecting money from the consumers on account of the sale. The further allegation is that petitioner although collected the money from different consumers under receipts but did not deposit either with the owner (complainant) or in the Bank account of M/S Chandrika Distributors. In this way, he has embezzled an amount close to Rs. 89,731/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he still continues to serve in the same company. It is further submitted that there is no material on record to show that the petitioner had in fact realized the amount from different consumers/buyers. This court finds from the impugned order that as per narration in the complaint the agreement subsequently signed between the petitioner and the complainant is on record 2 containing his signature whereunder he has admitted that he did receive the amount but did not deposit. Learned counsel for the petitioner orally submits before this court that the said document does not contain his signature. Having regard to the allegations and the materials available in support thereof, this court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the application seeking anticipatory bail stands rejected. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)