← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21227/2016rejected

Rajendra Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-09-07Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21227 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Rajendra Singh Son of Parshuram Singh Proprietor of Sri Ram Jee Rice Mill, Rajpur Mill, Code S-13, Resident of Village+PO- Rajpur, PS Rajpur District Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. Rohtas Sasaram. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kr.Srivastav(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 07-09-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner has filed this petition for modification of the order dated 08.12.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50924 of 2015. The petitioner was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 08.12.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50924 of 2015 on his undertaking to deposit 20% of Rs. 37,12,527.79 within four months from the date of order. The learned Judicial Magistrate was also directed to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner if the petitioner fails to deposit 20% of Rs. 37,12,527.79 within four months but it appears that petitioner has not deposited a single farthing even after lapse of more than ten months from the date of order. The learned Judicial Magistrate has also not cared to see the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21227 of 2016 (2) dt.07-09-2016 2/2 order dated 08.12.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50924 of 2015 in which direction was given to the learned Judicial Magistrate to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner if he fails to deposit 20% of Rs. 37,12,527.79 within four months from the receipt of the order dated 08.12.2015.

I am not at all satisfied with the reasons for not depositing the amount as the petitioner has already undertaken to deposit the same.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I find no merit in the modification petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T