Ramanuj Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23977 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2019 Thana- NARDIGANJ District- Nawada ====================================================== Ramanuj Prasad W/o Late Jayram Singh R/o village- Srirampur, P.S.- Hisua, District- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shivendra Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr. Sona Shrivastava, Advocate Mr. Ram Pravesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 341, 323, 406, 409, 467, 468, 420, 506, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to prosecution case, it is evidence that the allegation is which regard to payment of government aid to the teacher and non-teaching staffs of a college i.e. Nardiganj College Nardinganj which alleged was given to the college for year 2012 and 2013 in the year 2017 and 2018 respectively.

2/4 Admittedly, the amount of government aid was given to the college staffs and the payment of aid and the beneficiaries were discriminated and the payment was not made according to the seniority of the teacher and staffs and the persons who were appointed earlier were given lesser amount whose as person appointed later on were given more money. It is further alleged that the complainant was senior than some other persons but he was given lesser amount than his Junior.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that as per allegation that the petitioner has distribute the amount in question without any authority. He further submits that in fact the informant is not a competent who lodged the complaint before the police and informant is also a beneficiary of distributed amount in question. He further submits that the amount in question was distributed on the basis of performance based not on the basis of seniority and for that purpose informant may approach the competent authority for redressal of his grievance.

The learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed

3/4 the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Nardiganj P.S. Case No. 300 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and also the following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the

4/4 petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) mdrashid/- U T