IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33345 of 2009 SMT.MADHU KUMARI, WIFE OF SHRI AWADHESH KUMAR, D/O- DR. VIR NARAYAN SAHU, RESIDENT OF DHAKA NIMUIA, P.S. – DHAKA, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR with Cr.Misc. No.33673 of 2009 SUSHIL KUMAR VERMA, S/O- LATE GOPALJI SHRIVASTAVA, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – SHANTIPURI, P.S. MOTIHARI TOWN, DISTRICT – EAST CHAMPARAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 16.11.2009 Heard Sri. Prakash Srivastava and Mr. Mahendra Thakur learned counsel for the petitioners in Cr. Misc. No. 33345 of 2009 and Cr. Misc. No. 33673 of 2009 as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The offence alleged is under sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner, Madhu Kumari that the allegation of getting the appointment on the basis of ingenuine certificate is absolutely incorrect. As a matter of fact, on her appointment being cancelled, the order of cancelling the appointment was assailed by the petitioner, Madhu Kumari in this court alongwith others in C.W.J.C. No. 6675 of 2009 and other analogous cases. The said writ application was allowed and the order of cancelling the appointment of the petitioner, Madhu Kumari was quashed. Sri Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the said order which is kept on record. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner, Sushil Kumar Verma that the allegation against him is that he accepted the joining of the petitioner, Madhu Kumari on being her transfer from Nawada to East Champaran, Motihari. Learned counsel for the State is not in a position to refute submissions made on behalf of the petitioners. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Ist Class Judicial Magistrate at Motihari in connection with Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 171 of 2002 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)