2025:JHHC:18206 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.7273 of 2024 ------ 1. Lalit Mandal, s/o Late Chhato Mandal @ Chhotu Mandal, aged 41 years, 2. Ramchandra Mandal @ Ram Chander Mandal S/o Digan Mandal, aged 52 years, Both R/o Gaadi Chunglo, PO- Chunglo, PS, Jamua, District- Giridih. … … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Umesh Kumar Pandit, S/o Loknath Pandit … … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Modi, Advocate For the State : Ms. Shweta Singh, A.P.P. ----- 08/ 08.07.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 & 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for offences under Sections 420/406/120(B)/34 of IPC. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that not even a single account-holder of the bank has complaint against the petitioners. In investigation there is nothing to suggest that from the account of any of the account-holders, money has been transferred in the account of these petitioners. 4. The learned counsel for the State submitted that the allegations against the petitioners is that there is a huge transaction in the account of these petitioners which suggests that they have committed bank fraud. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank submits that the petitioners being the agent has taken money from several customers but has not deposited in the bank. He submits that by playing fraud upon the customers, Malti Devi has credited huge amounts in her account and the account of these petitioners and thereafter all these account were accumulated by opening another account. 6. The learned counsel for the State also submits that on 2025:JHHC:18206 2 the complaint of one unknown customer, the bank initiated an inquiry and unearthed the defalcation but she submits that there is no other complainant or customer who stated that they have been cheated. On query, she submits that there is no name of any of the account holders from whose account, the amount has been transferred. 7. After hearing the parties, I find that only on accumulation of huge sum in the account of these petitioners, these petitioners have been suspected to be involved in siphoning amount from the accounts of several persons but there is no statement of any of the account holders. 8. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to allow this application. 9. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioners, above named, are directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of their surrender or arrest, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, in connection with Giridih (T) PS Case No.9 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioners and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in their name or in the name of their ancestors in which they are having share and to that effect, they have to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating their share in the property. The petitioners should cooperate with the investigation and appear before the concerned Court once in every fifteen days, till submission of the final report, failing which, it will be opened to the concerned court to take action with regard to cancellation of bail. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Sandeep. Cp-3