Vijay Kumar Rajak @ Bijay Kumar Razak v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.43898 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2016 Thana -AMAUR District- PURNIA ====================================================== Vijay Kumar Rajak @ Bijay Kumar Razak, son of Jai Prakash Rajjak, resident of village-Gunda Chowk, Gulabbagh, Purnea, at present resident of village- Pachatkiya Tola, P.S.-Sadar, District- Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar &
2. The District Manager, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Purnea, Bihar, Patna.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party No.1: Smt. Madhuri Lata, APP For the Opposite Party No.2: Mr. Harish Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 4/ 09-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State.
The Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Amour P.S. Case No.30 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 406, 420 Indian Penal Code.
There is allegation against this petitioner that 769.65 quintals paddy was delivered to the rice mill of the petitioner by the informant. Receipt with respect to aforesaid paddy is being enclosed with the report, but no such receipt has been enclosed by the informant.
Case diary has been received.
The learned APP after verifying the case diary submits that there is no such receipt available in the case diary.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43898 of 2016 (4) dt.09-03-2017 2/2 Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the informant wants him to put signature on the back side of letter dated 22.12.2015 (Annexure-2) without any basis as he has never received the paddy as alleged in the written report. It is mentioned in Annexure-2 that receiving with respect of 769.65 quintals paddy has not been shown on the back page of the letter, but there is no mention of any detail by which aforesaid paddy has been delivered to the petitioner by the informant.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioner, named above, within six weeks from today in connection with Amour P.S. Case No.30 of 2016, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of `10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub Judge VI-cumAdditional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purena, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P. C. (Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T