Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12870 of 2012 (2) dt.28-03-012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.12870 of 2012 ====================================================== 1.Prakash Kumar Shrivastava 2.Uday Kumar Shrivastava, Both sons of late Ram Nagina Prasad, resident of Mohalla-Akhara Ghat Nazirpur, P.S.-Ahiyapur, Dist.-Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 28-03-2012 Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with a case in which cognizance for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] has been taken. It is stated that the petitioners are being prosecuted in a criminal case with ulterior motive. They have not received any amount from the complainant. Save and except ocular allegation made by the complainant, there is no documentary proof to support the allegation that the petitioners have ever received the amount in question. Even otherwise it is submitted that the allegation made would at best attract civil dispute. Be that as it may, considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners named above in the event of arrest or surrender, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12870 of 2012 (2) dt.28-03-012 amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Muzaffarpur in connection with Tr. No.37770 of 2011 arising out of Complaint Case No.2111 of 2008 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. as also subject to the conditions (i) that both the bailors will be close relative of the petitioners who will give separate affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioners (ii) that the petitioners 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 they shall remain present before the court on the dates fixed for hearing of the case. If they want to remain absent, then they shall take prior permission of the court and in case of compelling and unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, they shall immediately inform the court and request that they may be permitted to be present through counsel (iv) that liberty is given to the complainant/State to make an appropriate application for modifying/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioners violate any of the conditions imposed by this court. Md.S./- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 406

Statute Text:
Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal breach of trust. Whoever commits criminal breach of trust shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.