Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.15890 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Om Prakash Rai S/O Saral Rai R/O Vill-Mahrauli, P.S.-Raghunathpur, Distt-Siwan .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 18-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under [STATUTE] . It is stated that no labourer has come forward with an allegation that payment has not been made to him. Under the MANREGA SCHEME accounts of labourers are opened in the Post Office and their wages are directly despatched to their respective accounts through cheques and no amount is directly received by Panchayat Raj Sewak from the bank. In the present case, withdrawal was made for payment to labourers who had worked earlier and a list of those workers known as Labour Payment List along with cheques were sent to the concerned Post Office on 24.6.2011 under the signature of the Mukhiya. The petitioner and the concerned Post Master received those Labour Payment List along with cheques on 24.6.2011. However, the concerned Post Office enchased those cheques subsequently in between 27.6.2011 to 1.7.2011 for payment to labourers and later payments Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15890 of 2012 (2) dt.18-04-2012 2 / 2 2 were also made. It is also contended that the petitioner is in Government service and is in custody since 1.2.2012. It is stated that he is not likely to abscond or tamper with the evidence. Be that as it may, considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the C.J.M., Saran at Chapra in connection with Daudpur P.S. case no.121 of 2011 subject to the 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 shall immediately inform the court and request that he may be permitted to be present through counsel (iv) that liberty is given to the State to make an appropriate application for modifying/recalling the order granting bail, if for any reason, the petitioner violates any of the conditions imposed by this Court. sudip/- (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.