IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2601 of 2010 01. SHYAM NARAYAN SINGH, S/0 Late Ram Samujh Singh, R/o At+ P.O.- Moap Kalan, P.S.- Imadpur, District- Bhojpur 02. Arun Kumar Dwivedi, S/o Sri Bishwa Nath Dubey, R/o- At+ P.O.- Banthu Sriram, P.S.- Ander, Via- Zeradei Distt.- Siwan 03. Nand Kishore Ojha, S/o Late Banaras Ojha, R/o Vill+ P.O.- Dhangaraha, P.S.- Baniapur, Via- Baniapur, Distt.-Saran (Chapra) 04. Rajendra Prasad, S/o Late Gorakh Prasad, R/o At+ P.O.- Jamao Bazar, P.S.- Jamo Bazar, Distt.- Siwan (Bihar) 05. Jawahir Singh, S/o Late Ramjiawan Singh, R/o Gossain Ghat Roas, Chhoti Khanjarpur, P.S.- Bari Khanjarpur, Distt.- Bhagalpur (Bihar) ….. Petitioners Versus The STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT ….. Opposite Party with Cr.Misc. No.46350 of 2009 LALLAN PRASAD (In F.I.R. named as Lallan) S/o Late Nabab Sah R/o Agiaon Bazari, P.S.- Agiaon Bazar, Distt.- Bhojpur :- Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar through Vigilance Deptt. :- Opposite Party ----------- 02 25.03.2010 Heard Mr. Bibhuti Prasad Pandey, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in both cases, as also Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned Special P.P. appearing for the Department of Vigilance. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 87 of 2008, corresponding to Special Case No. 57 of 2008 registered under Sections 406, 409, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120(B) of the Penal Code as also under Sections 7/8 13(2) read with Section 13 (I) (c) (d) of the P.C. Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for 2 the petitioners that all the petitioners are Engineers holding different posts, in the Quality Control Department, Government of Bihar. It is submitted that according to the F.I.R. co-accused persons, who were posted as field Engineers are said to have paid certain higher amount of the money to the contractors without any actual earth filling works in Jamindari Bandh, Baruane, under the Pandarak Block. Petitioners were no way responsible for such payments to the contractors. According to him, petitioners being the Engineers of Quality Control Department had pointed out in their report that the contractors are not entitled for such higher amount of money, but without having the view point of the petitioners, they have been arrayed in the category of accused under some misconception. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court towards the order dated 27.8.2009 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9612 of 2009 Annexure-6 of the first case by which co-accused Sachidanand Singh, who was posted as Executive Engineer in the field and was responsible for making payment to the contractors, has been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail till submission of charge-sheet. Learned Special P.P. appearing on behalf 3 of the Vigilance has also not disputed the aforesaid position. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances these two petitions are allowed in the same terms and the above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from today till submission of the charge-sheet in the present case, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Special Judge Vigilance, Patna in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 87 of 2008, corresponding to Special Case No. 57 of 2008, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and subject to further condition that petitioners shall fully cooperate in conclusion of the investigation of the case and whenever they are required by the I.O. in this case for investigation they shall make themselves available for the same. Non-compliance of any of the conditions shall be construed as misuse of privilege of bail and that may entail cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners by the court below itself. P.K. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)