Sanjeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.13560 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -255 Year- 2017 Thana -LAURIYA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Sanjeev Kumar, Son of Dhruv Ram @ Dhrudev Ram, Resident of Village- Inarbarwa, P.S.- Ram Nagar, District- West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vibhakar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-04-2018 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 255/2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner, who happens to be the Ex-headmaster of R.P. School, Inarbarwa had withdrawn Rs. 1,26,238/- for the financial year 2007 -2008 but he neither completed the construction work nor deposited the money back. Learned counsel for the petitioner drawn my attention towards the Annexure -2, which is a letter issued under the signature of District Programme Officer, West Champaran to state that the work has already been completed and no amount is due with the petitioner.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, in view of the above facts as well as in view of annexure -2, let the petitioner above named, in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13560 of 2018 (2) dt.06-04-2018 2/2 the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM -1st, Bettiah, in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 255/2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C, it is further subject to the condition that:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation and make himself available as and when required by the police and on the event of failure on his part to appear before the police on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T