Binod Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34959 of 2016 (7) dt.07-12-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34959 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -460 Year- 2010 Thana -TAJPUR District- SAMASTIPUR ======================================================

1. Binod Kumar, son of Vishnudeo Mahto resident of Village- Pateypur Gopinath, P.S.- Pusa, District- Samastipur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The North Bihar Power distribution company limited, Patna. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 07/ 07.12.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with a case registered under sections 379, 405, 406, 415, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and various sections of the Electricity Act. Petitioner happens to be manager of the concerned plant and admittedly, owner of the said plant has already been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate bench of this court vide order dated 23.02.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. no.5088/2012.

Learned counsel appearing for the Board submits that, as a matter of fact, proprietor of the said plant was granted privilege of anticipatory bail with condition that he should deposit arrears of energy charge within a period of two months

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34959 of 2016 (7) dt.07-12-2016 but the aforesaid dues has not been made as yet. Perusal of annexure 2 to the petition goes to show that a coordinate bench of this court while granting privilege of anticipatory bail to proprietor Praveen Kumar Sinha @ Praveen Kumar @ Raju vide order dated 23.02.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. no.5088/2012 had never imposed any pre-condition for acceptance of bail bond of the aforesaid co- accused and, therefore, there is nothing on record to show that any condition was imposed on proprietor for grant of anticipatory bail to him.

Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties and also with a view to keep parity of justice, let the petitioner, in the event of arrest/ surrender within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order to the concerned court, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Shaukash Chandra, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Samastipur/ concerned court in Tajpur P.S. Case no. 460/2010 subject to condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J) U T