IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24393 of 2010 CHHOTU KUMAR S/O SRI BHOLA PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE- PARCO, P.S.- BIHTA, DIST.- PATNA --- PETITIONER. Versus STATE OF BIHAR--- OPP. PARTY. ----------- 6/ 26-03-2011 Heard the parties. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a criminal prosecution registered under section 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution case, 300 Kg. of old copper wires and 75 Kg. of brass particles were recovered from a pick up van driven by co-accused Ranjeet Kumar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a matter of fact, the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of the seized articles from Maa Sharda Metal Works, vide Annexure-2 series. Details regarding his purchase of the seized copper scrap have been given in paragraph-11 of the petition. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, no case of theft has ever been instituted with respect to the seized articles and, therefore, there is absolutely no question of application of section 414 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also highlighted that co-accused Ranjeet Kumar and Sanjay Kumar Sinha @ Sanjay Sinha have been granted anticipatory bail by orders dated 14.06.2010 and 20.07.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20090 and 20497, both of 2010, respectively. 2 Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, the above named petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Patna in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 99 of 2010(G.R. No. 1460 of 2010), subject to conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr .P.C. as also subject to further conditions that: (A) one of the bailors must be government servant, (B) another bailor shall be a family member or close relation of the petitioner, who will file an affidavit in the court below showing his/her relationship with the petitioner, (C) if the petitioner is found involved in same and similar nature of cases in future, then in that case the informant/ prosecution shall be at liberty to file a petition for cancellation of the bail of the petitioner, and if such a petition is filed, the court below would be obliged to dispose of the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned 3 and (D) the petitioner shall make regular pairvi in the court below in the present case either by appearing himself in person or through representation by his lawyer on each and every dates, and if on two consecutive dates petitioner fails to make pairvi, then the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)