Parshuram Yadav @ Prashuram Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No 81363 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2018 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== PARSHURAM YADAV @ PRASHURAM YADAV Son of Bhagirathi Yadav @ Bhagirathi Chaudhary Resident of Village - Mahanthawan, P.S.- Kateya, District - Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 09-09-2020 As of now, the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing. The matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual Court proceedings with the aid of audio visual technology.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Gopalpur Police Station (for brevity, PS) Case No 89 of 2018 instituted for the offence punishable under Section (s) 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 506/34 of Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81363 of 2019(3) dt.09-09-2020 2/3 The prosecution case alleges that the petitioner has allured the informants to deposit money with the assurance that he would arrange employment for them abroad. Informants have alleged that neither the arrangement, as assured, has been done nor the amounts, realized from them, have been returned. It is submitted by petitioner's counsel that the amounts were deposited with one Munna Travel Agency even as per allegations made in the first informant report (for brevity, FIR). The further allegation is that the informant Vinay Kumar Singh has not even signed the FIR. Being brother of the proprietor of Munna Travel Agency, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is now in custody since 16.07.2019.

The petitioner, after filing the instant petition, had filed another bail application being Cr Misc No 76196 of 2019 due to inadvertence. The same, however, was dismissed, as not pressed.

The learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the rival submissions and the period of custody, prayer for bail is allowed. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on his furnishing bonds of Rs

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81363 of 2019(3) dt.09-09-2020 3/3 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate XI, Gopalganj in Gopalpur PS Case No 89 of 2018 subject to the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U T