IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11030 of 2010 RAM SURESH SINGH,s/o Late Raghi Singh, resident of village-Mahadeoganj,P.S.- Navanagar (Sonbarsha O.P.)District-Buxar. .. .. .. Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR .. .. Opp.Party ---------- 02/ 26-04-2010 Heard Mr. Bachchan Jeee Ojha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with C.R.No.16P/2009 dated 27-02-2009, corresponding to Trial No.2762 of 2009, registered under Sections 33, 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act as also under Sections 5, 9, 10 and 14 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990. According to prosecution case, the petitioner is running a Saw Mill at village-Mahadeoganj besides N.H.-31. Some wooden logs were seized by the informant and some machines were also found there. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner’s Saw Mill is in existence since October 1996 and he applied for licence in terms of Section 5 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990, but that was rejected. Against which he went in appeal and finally the matter was remitted back. On remand, again the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of licence was rejected and against that a fresh appeal is still pending. Therefore, it is submitted that the matter regarding issuance of 2 licence is still subjudice before the appellate authority. It is also submitted that, in fact, petitioner’s Saw Mill was not found in running condition and only certain wooden logs were found there. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and has pointed out that similar criminal case was lodged against the petitioner as far back as in 1997 and the prayer for issuance of licence under the provisions of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 has been rejected by the competent authority, yet the petitioner is alleged to have been running a Saw Mill, and therefore, he may not be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. In response to the query made by the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has clearly stated that his client is not running any Saw Mill and the entire allegation is false. He further undertakes on behalf of the petitioner that the business in question shall be completely closed by the petitioner, unless and until valid licence is issued in his favour by the competent authority. In view of the aforesaid undertaking and in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is an old man, aged more than 60 years, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from today in the above noted case, the above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri K.M.Tiwari, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Buxar, subject to the 3 conditions as laid down under sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and subject to the further conditions that : (a) one of the bailors must be a Government servant or close family members of the petitioner, who will file an affidavit in the court below showing his/her relationship with the petitioner, (b) 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 and (c) the petitioner shall not run the business in question unless and until the prayer for licence made by him is finally allowed by the competent authority under the provisions of Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990. In case it is 4 found that petitioner is running a Saw Mill without valid licence, then in that case prosecution shall be at liberty to file a petition in the court below for cancellation of his bail bonds and if such a petition is filed, then bail bonds of the petitioner may be cancelled in accordance with the provisions of law by giving him an opportunity of hearing. AH/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)