Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1592/2017bail granted

Neel Kamal Mishra v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance, Bihar, Patna

2017-01-18Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1592 of 2017 (2) dt.18-01-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1592 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -110 Year- 2016 Thana -VIGILANCE District- PATNA ====================================================== Neel Kamal Mishra, son of Kedar Nath Mishra.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Through Vigilance, Bihar, Patna .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, Assistant to Mr. Ramakant Sharma (L.O.,Inc., Vigilance) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 110 of 2016 registered under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The accusation is that petitioner was apprehended by the Vigilance Department at the time of taking bribe of Rs.10,000/- from Banti Kumar Choudhary.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is class-IV employee in the electricity department but with ulterior motive he has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 22.10.2016.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1592 of 2017 (2) dt.18-01-2017 Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Vigilance North Bihar, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 110 of 2016. Out of two sureties, one surety must be the close relative of the petitioner. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U T