IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24187 of 2011 C.L.Shukla S/o late Shri Rampati Shukla, R/o Surya Niwas, Lal Kothi Compund, Near Victor X-Ray, P.S.-Civil Lines, District-Gaya, Siwan. ……..Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar. ………..Opposite Party ----------- 02 22.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint case registered under sections 407, 467, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant claims himself to be clearing and forwarding agent of M/s Maihar Cement, which is a unit of Century Textiles and Industries Ltd., a company registered under the Indian Companies Act. According to the complainant, a consignment was dispatched in his name and the same was lifted or allowed to be lifted by the Chief Goodshed Supervisor, Gaya Railway Goodshed, who has been impleaded as accused no. 4 in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is Manager (sales) in Maihar Cement. The complainant has wrongly alleged that the Railway receipt dated 2 15.07.2009 was endorsed in his name, to take delivery of consignment of 46,266 bags of cement, at Gaya Railway Station. He has brought on record the aforesaid Railway receipt bearing R.R. No. 262003617, dated 15.02.2009, which has been issued in the name of Gaya Warehouse Maihar Cement, 53, Tekari Road, Gaya, meaning thereby that it was in the name of company. The petitioner who is Manager of Maihar Cement at Gaya had authorized Mr. Shankar Prasad of Sri Sai Traders, Ramna Road, Gaya to take delivery of the materials. It was in this background that the Railway Officials rightly did not deliver the consignment to the complainant and as per the endorsement made on the Railway receipt in favour of Sri Sai Traders the consignment was delivered in favour of Sri Sai Traders. He further submits that consignment of goods has to be delivered to only those persons in whose name the Railway receipt has been issued or the person in whose name the Railway receipt has been issued has authorized some other persons to take delivery. It has also been submitted that company finding the work of the complainant who was earlier appointed as C and F Agent, to be not satisfactory, had given one month’s notice 3 to terminate the agreement on 18.06.2009. The existing agreement with the complainant got terminated. Further submission is that the complainant had also instituted a police case which was numbered as Delha P.S. Case No. 69 of 2009 under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code on 20.07.2009, with respect to the consignment in question and on investigation the police submitted final report holding the same to be a mistake of fact. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner, namely, C.L. Shukla, in the event of his arrest or surrender before learned court below within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1399 of 2009. Safik (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)