Siyaram Singh v. The State Of Bihar Through Economic Offence Department , Bihar , Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41466 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -7 Year- 2014 Thana -ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR DistrictPATNA ====================================================== Siyaram Singh son of Sahajanand Singh Yadav resident of village - Hiramanpur, P.S. - Bihta, District Patna. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar through Economic offence Department, Bihar , Patna. .... .... Opposite Party.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. V.N.P Sinha, EOU Unit Mrs. Soni Srivastava, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 20-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Economic Offence P.S. Case No. 7 of 2014 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66 (C)/66(D) of the I.T. Act.

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with other accused persons are said to have engaged in managing the scholar to appear in the examination of the Railway Recruitment Board in place of weaker candidates by morfing their photographs in lieu of realization of Rs.8 to 10 lakhs per candidate and the petitioner is said to have been managing such candidates and collect money from him for the said purpose along with some other accused persons.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41466 of 2017 (04) dt.20-12-2017 - 2 - that the petitioner has no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He has no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. No incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. The petitioner was not apprehended on the spot. The petitioner has been languishing in custody since 28.06.2017. Other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No.17584 of 2017 vide order dated 10.05.2017. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Economic Offence Unit has submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of finding out the candidates and collecting money from them for the aforesaid purpose. Petitioner has been absconding since 2014 causing delay in the trial of the case. The chargesheet in the case has been submitted.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge or after three months from today, whichever happens earlier.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) Trivedi/- U T