IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.48965 of 2008 BHRIGU NANDAN SAH S/O- BALIRAM SAH, R/O- VILLAGE MANIGANJ, P.S. SHAMBHUGANJ, DISTRICT - BANKA Versus STATE OF BIHAR THRU.VIGILANCE ----------- 3. 12.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Special P.P. (Vigilance) The offence alleged is under Section 7/13(2) read with section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The allegation against the petitioner is that he demanded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- from the complainant, who is the Halka Karamchari, in connection with recommendation of the mutation applications. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that allegation against the petitioner is absolutely false. As a matter of fact, the said karamchari was not even present in the office as he was unauthorizedly absenting from the office, which would be apparent on perusal of the notice given by the concerned Circle Officer as contained in Annexure– 4 to the effect that after 21.01.2000 till the date of notice i.e. 10th April 2008 he was absent from the office. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, persons who are in inimical terms with the petitioner have arranged to get this false case registered against him. The complainant was not present in the office - 2 - whether pre-trap or post-trap arranged by the vigilance cell since there is no signature of the complainant over the said memorandum. It is further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 28.08.2008 and he being the government servant is not absconding. Learned Special P.P. appearing for the Vigilance opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there are various signatures on the pre-trap and post-trap having initials and as such cannot be said that the complainant was not present. It is further submitted that during the post-trap, notes of different denominations were recovered from the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner, namely, Bhrigu Nandan Sah 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 Special Judge, Vigilance –II, Patna in connection with Special Case No. 22 of 2008 (Vigilance P.S. Case No. 57 of 2008) with condition that one of the sureties should be close relative of the petitioner. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)