Omkar Nath v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20139 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -433 Year- 2017 Thana -DANAPUR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Omkar Nath Son of Kishore Kumar Singh Resident of MohallaTirumala Ram Jaipal Nagar, Gola Road, P.S. Rupaspur, Distt. Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== WITH Criminal Miscellaneous No.21247 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -433 Year- 2017 Thana -DANAPUR District- PATNA ====================================================== Raj Singh son of Sri Achhe Lal Singh @ Akashay Lal Singh, R/o. VillageShivpur, P.S. Saraiya, District- Muzaffarpur. At present residing Flat No.102, R.D. Complex, C.D.A. Colony, Shastrinagar, P.S. Shastrinagar, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In Cr.Misc. No.20139 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar - 1, APP (In Cr.Misc. No.21247 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners are in custody in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No.433 of 2017, a case under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

P/2 According to F.I.R, a NGO, namely, "Swarn Jayanti Seva Samiti" was running at Danapur in the district of Patna. The petitioners are alleged to be Secretary and Chief Accounts Officer of the said NGO. Other office bearers are also accused. The prosecution case is that the informant and others applied for getting job in the said NGO on the basis of advertisement in daily newspaper. The candidates appeared in the examination but they were failed deliberately and thereafter money was demanded to ensure their appointment. Salary and other perks were also disclosed to allure them. Accordingly they meted the demand. However, the job was not ensured and different refund cheques, issued in favour of different persons by the NGO, allegedly bounced. For the aforesaid occurrence different cases were lodged by the different victims of the cheating.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that when the informant and others failed in the examination, just to put wrongful pressure false and concocted case has been lodged. The petitioners are in custody since 15.12.2017. Investigation of the case is already closed now. The F.I.R would reveal that the informant and others were themselves indulged in unlawful activity of ensuring backdoor entry on different posts of

P/3 the NGO or in the Civil courts as alleged, therefore, they cannot get protection of law.

To counter the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the informant as well as the State submits that, in fact, the petitioners are running a syndicate and they have link with other State also with deliberate intention to cheat the innocent people who are seeking job and several cases have been lodged against the petitioners for the aforesaid allegation. Therefore, they do not deserve bail. Furthermore, during investigation, the allegations have been found true and charge sheet has already been submitted accordingly.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that the informant has disclosed criminal antecedent of the petitioners in the counter affidavits. However, the counter affidavit does not disclose that the petitioners have knowledge of the aforesaid cases and, as such, deliberatey suppressed the aforesaid facts in their bail application.

Considering the nature of allegation and the period already undergone as well as completion of the investigation of the case especially the facts that the informant and others are apparently found indulging in illegal activity of getting backdoor entry in job so they cannot get protection of law, let the

P/4 petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Courtbelow where the case is pending in connection with Danapur Police Station Case No. 433 of 2017, with condition that the petitioners shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioners.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T