Jay Narayan Rajak @ Jai Narain Rajak v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance Department, 6 Circular Road, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18987 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -16 Year- 2016 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Jay Narayan Rajak @ Jai Narain Rajak, aged about 36 years son of Late Bhumi Rajak, resident of Village- Garh Mohani, P.S.- Gogari, DistrictKhagaria. A/p Clerk, Land Acquisition Branch, Patna Collectoriate, P.S. Gandhi Maidan, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through Vigilance Department, 6 Circular Road, Patna .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anurag Saurav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma (Law Off. Vig) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 05-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner learned counsel, appearing for the Vigilance.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections-7/13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Petitioner is said to have been caught red handed taking bribe of Rs. 20,000/- The accusation against petitioner is that he demanded Rs. 20,000/- for making payment to allegation maker, namely, Vishwanath Mahto and subsequently, the allegation maker gave information to Vigilance Officials and, thereafter, a special team was constituted and the petitioner was trapped by the Vigilance Officials near Gandhi Maidan.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18987 of 2016 (2) dt.05-05-2016 2/2 Submission on behalf of petitioner is that joint lands of allegation maker as well as his brother namedly, Kashi Nath Mahto were acquired and the payment of compensation of the aforesaid lands was made to brother of allegation maker on 05-022016 and the aforesaid payment was made to the above-said Kashi Nath Mahto on the request of allegation maker and, therefore, question of making payment to the allegation maker does not arise. Moreover, the petitioner has been framed in this case as he had made complain to District Magistrate against the Nazir of his office and that is the reason of false implication of the petitioner in the present case.

Considering the above-said facts and circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties and also taking note of this fact that the petitioner is languishing in jail custody since 17-02-2016 and, investigation against him appears to have been completed, let the petitioner named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 16 of 2016 (Special Case No. 04 of 2016) to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Vigilance-I, Patna. A.K.V./- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) U T