Hare Ram Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49781 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -172 Year- 2015 Thana -MANJHI District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Hare Ram Giri Son of Janardan Giri R/o Village Liladhar Giri Ke Mathia, P.S. Manjhi, District Saran at Chapra .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Shyam Babu Srivastava, son of Kailash Bihari Srivastava, resident of village-Chakiya P.S. Manjhi, district-Saran, Chapra. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kr.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 29-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323/ 406/420/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that altogether false allegation has been levelled against this petitioner who was authorized by A.S. Marine Consultancy to negotiate for bringing candidates who are willing to go abroad for obtaining employment. He submits that as per the agreement, an authorization was given to the petitioner by the Company but he was not entitled to receive money. It is further submitted that on the contrary, the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49781 of 2015 (4) dt.29-02-2016 P2/2 Company that whatever money was deposited by the informant, was paid towards utilization for passport and visa for going to Malaysia. It is also submitted that air-ticket was sent to the petitioner but he refused to go on the appointed day. The Company has also sent a legal notice to the informant asking him to return the money which was invested by the Company in him as fare.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances and taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court feels that it is a fit case where the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail, accordingly, let the petitioner, in the event of his arrest / surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the each amount to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-5 (Sub-Judge-5), Saran at Chapra, in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 172/2015 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Saif/- U T