SURESH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED Suresh Chandra, Pawan Kumar Jain and Mahendra Pal Singh have moved three separate bail applications in Case crime no. 261 Of 2012 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Tundla, District Firozabad. Since all these bail applications are related to same case crime number and same episode, therefore, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

(2.) HEARD Sri Kamal Krishna, learned counsel for accused -applicant Mahendra Pal Singh, Sri J.P.Pandey, learned counsel for accused -applicant Suresh Chandra and Sri Jitendra Kumar Misra, learned counsel for accused -applicant Pawan Kumar Jain and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

(3.) THE prosecution version, in brief, is that provident fund accounts of employees of Nagar Palika Parishad, Tundla, District Firozabad are maintained and operated by the Post Office, Tundla District Firozabad. Suresh Chandra, Patak Sahayak (accused -applicant) was maintaining the pass -books of Provident Fund accounts of the employees of Nagar Palika Parishad, Tundla. It was his responsibility to deposit the provident fund amount in the account of the employees every month. He was also responsible for updating the passbooks of the employees. Pass -books were supposed to be sent to the Post Office each month for updating the entries.