Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.283 of 2011 ====================================================== Binod Tiwari, son of Sri Mukti Nath Tiwari, resident of Village – Gandhu Chapar, P S – Mairwa, District - Siwan .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y V Giri, Sr. Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER 8 11-04-2012 Petitioner is an accused in Mairwa (Jeeradei) P S Case No.64 of 2007 under [STATUTE] as well as section 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation was that he along with his brother committed the murder of Up-Pramukh in his office. Petitioner has been in custody in this matter since 5.9.2007. The Court had called for antecedent report from the Superintendent of Police with regard to the present petitioner as well as the status of the trial since petitioner has remained as an under-trial prisoner for almost five years now. From the report of the Superintendent of Police it is Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.283 of 2011 (8) dt.11-04-2012 2 / 3 2 evident that there is no criminal antecedent with regard to the district of Saran. Though there are two cases in relation to Siwan district but petitioner is supposed to be on bail in those cases. The report of the trial court also indicates that beyond the examination of three witnesses the trial has not progressed and 13 witnesses are yet to be examined for which steps have been taken but without any success. Contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that one of the reasons that the witnesses are not turning up is that some of them are themselves as accused and in fact one of them has been convicted in some case recently and therefore, there are no chances of the witnesses turning up immediately to facilitate expeditious trial and the matter seems to be a little remote as of now. That is the position also which has been indicated in the report of the I.O. of the case as would be evident form the order sheet of the court. Looking at the period petitioner has spent in custody as also the fact that trial is not likely to conclude immediately and that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent and he undertakes not to indulge in any further criminal activity after release, let the petitioner Binod Tiwari be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.283 of 2011 (8) dt.11-04-2012 3 / 3 3 bonds of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan in Sessions Trial No.32 of 2009 arising out of Mairwa (Jeeradei) P S Case No.64 of 2007. One of the surety will be executed by the father of the petitioner and the other by an elected representative of the area, not below the rank of a Mukhiya. It is clarified that petitioner will co-operate in the trial by appearing either through himself or through his counsel and will not abscond. It is also recorded that if any evidence of petitioner indulging in any criminal activity emerges in any of the three districts of Saran, Siwan or Gopalganj, benefit of bail which has been granted by this Court in the present case, may also be taken away by the trial court. The petitioner will also report to the nearest police station of his residence and inform about his activities to the Officer Incharge every thirty days, till further orders of this Court. Bail application is allowed with conditions as indicated above. R.K.Pathak/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 384

Statute Text:
Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code. Extortion. Whoever commits extortion shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.