Dr. Ravi Prakash Babloo v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10437 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -347 Year- 2015 Thana -CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- SARAN ====================================================== Dr. Ravi Prakash 'Babloo', son of Late Om Prakash Sinha, resident of village- Sughar Chapra, P.O. + P.S.- Manjhi, District- Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyan Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 19-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 347/15 for offences alleged under Sections 420, 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case, as lodged by the Finance Officer, Jai Prakash University, is that the petitioner, being custodian of the records as the Registrar of University, had not produced certain documents and papers which were required in Vigilance Case No. 10/2015 which related to some financial irregularities in which the petitioner was also an accused. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, cannot be solely responsible as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10437 of 2016 (3) dt.19-05-2016 2/3 custodian of those records because he was posted in the University for a limited period and there were many other Registrars during the relevant period when financial irregularities were alleged to be committed. He submits that some of the co-accused in other cases as well as vigilance case have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail. It is submitted that at this stage allegations and counter-allegations or defence cannot be adjudicated and being a responsible officer of the university this application for grant of anticipatory bail is in anticipation of arrest.

Learned APP for the State, however, submits that the petitioner is named in the First Information Report along with another co-accused and many of the witnesses have supported the prosecution case, hence, opposes the prayer for bail. Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances stated above and the allegation is of not furnishing required documents in the vigilance case so lodged earlier which cannot be attributable solely on the petitioner, let petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10437 of 2016 (3) dt.19-05-2016 3/3 Muffasil P.S. Case No. 347/15, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajesh/- U T