IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43048 of 2009 SURESH SINGH @ SURESH KUMAR SINGH, SON OF SRI RAM PRASAD SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-TARAR, P.O.-TARAR, P.S.-DAUDNAGAR, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD. …..Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THRU. VIG. …..Opposite Party. WITH Cr.Misc. No.767 of 2010 ASHOK KUMAR, SON OF LATE JAGAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-POKHARAHA, P.S.-AURANGABAD (M), DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. …..Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THRU. VIG. …..Opposite Party. ----------- 02/ 11.01.2010 Since both the above bail applications have arisen out of one occurrence i.e. Spl. Case No. 70 of 2009 arising out of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 91 of 2009 under Sections 7, 8, 13(2) read with Sections 13(1)(D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, these are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. One Raj Nandan Singh, informant of this case is a P.D.S. dealer. He was lifting grains from the godown after depositing drafts. Allegation is that Ashok Kumar was demanding Rs. 3000/- for depositing bank draft but the informant was not willing to pay the amount. So he complaint to the Vigilance. The matter was verified and the verification indicated that the allegations were prima facie true. A raiding party was organized and pre-trap 2 memorandum was prepared. On 08.10.2009 both the accused persons were arrested after accepting bribe money of Rs. 3000/- red handed. On behalf of Petitioner Suresh Singh @ Suresh Kumar Singh, it has been submitted that he has no concern with the official work. He, himself is a P.D.S. dealer and has gone to the office for some official work. The complainant tendered money to accused Ashok Kumar. As Ashok Kumar was asked the complainant to give money to this petitioner so he kept it. Except this, there is no role of this petitioner. But since he was present at the place of occurrence and handed over money to Ashok Kumar, he was arrested by the raiding team without any overt act. He is in custody since 09.10.2009. On behalf of Petitioner Ashok Kumar, it has been submitted that he is innocent and not committed any offence. The bribe money was forcibly kept in his pocket by the complainant. He is in custody since 09.01.2009. Learned Counsel on behalf of Vigilance has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and has submitted that both the petitioners were caught red handed with bribe money. The G.C. notes numbers were found same 3 with pre trap memorandum. The hands of both the petitioners were found red after being washed by solution. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, Petitioner namely Suresh Singh @ Suresh Kumar Singh (Cr. Misc. No. 43048 of 2009) is directed to be released from custody on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge Vigilance-1, Patna/concerned court in connection with Spl. Case No. 70 of 2009 arising out of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 91 of 2009 as he is not the person responsible and he was not an authority. So far as Petitioner namely Ashok Kumar (Cr. Misc. No. 767 of 2010) is concerned after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, presently I am not inclined to grant him bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. kksinha/ ( Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)