Umesh Ram @ Umesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.32306 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -307 Year- 2014 Thana -MOTIPUR District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Umesh Ram @ Umesh Paswan S/o Dinanath Paswan Resident of Village Budhanpur, P.S. Deoria, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ganjendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 06-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Motipur P.S. Case No. 307 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly the petitioner persuaded Sangeeta Devi, wife of Pappu Sharma to deposit Rs. 500/- per month for three months and then loan will be given @ 2% interest from D.D.L. Family Micro Finance Company and the informant and other ladies also deposited accordingly but no loan was provided to them and the cheque granted to her was found forged one.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has not played any major role, he has been implicated due to dirty village politics. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he explained the scheme of D.D.L. Family Micro Finance, there is no allegation that he received any amount from

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32306 of 2015 (3) dt.06-11-2015 2/2 any candidate. The amount was allegedly deposited in the office of Micro Finance and, as such the petitioner suffering in custody since 16.09.2014, deserves sympathetic consideration to which the learned A.P.P. opposes by submitting that during investigation witnesses have supported the prosecution version and he has got criminal antecedent.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the limited role of the petitioner and further considering that chargesheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence and, as such, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Learned C.J.M., Muzaffarpur arising out of Motipur P.S. Case No. 307 of 2014 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U