Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.21821 of 2012 ====================================================== Hare Ram Yadav, S/O Late Eklal Yadav, Resident of Village- Kulhariya, Police Station- Marouna, District- Supaul, Headmaster, Primary School Gamharia .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 12-06-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with a case which was initially instituted under [STATUTE] but subsequently, it appears that [STATUTE] has also been added. It is stated that the present case has been instituted on mere suspicion that the petitioner who is Headmaster of the school was taking the rice meant for Mid-day Meal for selling. When the villagers caught him, he told that the rice is being taken for cleaning and polishing but the villagers were not convinced and the F.I.R. was instituted. It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 1.4.1973 and has unblemished service career. He joined the Primary School, Gamharia as Headmaster in 2004 and since then he is posted there. The petitioner is not likely to abscond or tamper with the evidence, if he is released on bail. Be that as it may, considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21821 of 2012 (2) dt.12-06-2012 2 / 2 2 from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with Marona P.S. Case No. 94 of 2011 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. and also on the following conditions: (i) That both the bailors will be close relative of the petitioner who will give separate affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner. (ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority. (iii) That he shall remain present before the court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If he wants to remain absent, then he shall take prior permission of the court and in case of compelling and unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, he will immediately inform the court and request that he may be permitted to be present through the counsel. (iv) That liberty is given to the State to make an appropriate application for modification/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioner violates any of the conditions imposed by this Court. Sanjeet/- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 409

Statute Text:
Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal breach of trust by public servant or by banker, merchant or agent, etc. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property in his capacity of a public servant or in the way of his business as a banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.