Dipendra Kumar Verma And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50004 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -556 Year- 2015 Thana -Bettiah Town DistrictWestchamparan(Bettiah) ======================================================

1. Dipendra Kumar Verma Son of Arun Kumar Prasad,

2. Ship @ Sipu @ Rajnish Kumar Verma, Son of Arun Kumar Prasad, Both are residents of village - Dhankutwa, Police Station - Balthar, District - West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.K. Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. R.B. Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 03-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

The Petitioners seek bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section(s) 406,420,467,468,471 of the Indian Penal Code.

Considering that there is no allegation about misappropriation against the Petitioner no. 2, in the event of surrender/arrest of the Petitioner, named above, within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 556 of 2015, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50004 of 2015 (2) dt.03-11-2015 2/3 each or any other surety to be fixed by the court below to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran subject to the conditions as laid down under sections 438(2) Cr. P. C.

Subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50004 of 2015 (2) dt.03-11-2015 3/3 bail will be liable to be cancelled.

So far as the prayer of the Petitioner no. 1 is concerned, in view of the nature of allegation, the same is rejected.

(Anjana Prakash, J) Prakash/- U T