Upendra Narain Singh @ Rintu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54740 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2016 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Upendra Narain Singh @ Rintu Son of Rajendra Singh Resident of Village - Uttari, P.s. Rajpur, District - Buxar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Ajay Kumar-1 For the informant :

Mr. Bindhyachal Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 30-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State as well as counsel for the informant. The petitioner seeks bail in Rupaspur P. S. Case No. 243 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 420, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged in the written report that the informant transferred an amount of Rs. six lakhs in the account of this petitioner and also paid Rs. three lakhs in cash for getting job for the post of Assistant in Patna Secretariat. It is further alleged in the written report that one Sanjay Singh came to the house of the informant and disclosed that he has good relation with this petitioner who had contact with superior officers of Bihar Government and he managed employment of certain persons as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54740 of 2018(3) dt.30-10-2018 2/2 Assistant. Thereafter, the informant paid the amount of Rs. 9 lakhs to the petitioner. The informant did not get the job. Thereafter she made request to return the amount but the petitioner refused to return the money.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that both the parties were having business transaction. He has further submitted as per written report the amount was paid by the informant to the petitioner for getting job by illegal means. It is not permissible in law to get job in such illegal manner. It has further been submitted that if any amount is due with the petitioner, civil remedy is available to the informant. Petitioner is in custody since 9.6.2018.

Considering the aforesaid, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the ACJM, Danapur, in connection with Rupaspur P. S. Case No. 243 of 2016 subject to the condition that both the bailers shall be the close relative of the petitioner. (Sanjay Priya, J) shyambihari/- U T