Pappu Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21138 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -369 Year- 2015 Thana -BALIA District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Pappu Sah, son of Prabhu Sah, Resident of Miralipur, P.S.- Baliya, DistrictBegusarai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.S.K. Lal, Adv. Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-05-2016 Heard.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a criminal prosecution registered under Section 406 and some other allied offences under the Indian Penal Code.

Though, the petitioner is named in the FIR vide Annexure-1 as an accused, but taking into consideration the fact that there appears to be some business dispute between the parties and also taking into consideration the fact that he is said to be the first offender, as has been asserted in paragraph 3 of the anticipatory bail application, this Court is inclined to accede to the prayer made on his behalf for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Begusarai in connection with

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21138 of 2016 (2) dt.19-05-2016 Baliya P.S. Case No. 369 of 2015, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and subject to further conditions that:

(A) One of the bailors must be government servant or close family members of the petitioner, who will file an affidavit in the court below showing his/her relationship with the petitioner, (B) if the petitioner is found involved in same and similar nature of cases in future, then in that case the informant/prosecution shall be at liberty to file a petition for cancellation of bail of the petitioner, and if such a petition is filed, the court below would be obliged to dispose of the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned;

(C) the petitioner shall make regular pairvi in the court below in the present case either by appearing himself in person or through representation by his lawyer on each and every date, and if on two consecutive dates petitioner fails to make pairvi, then the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Arvind/- U T