IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8391 of 2009 MD.MUMTAZ, S/o late Shekhawat Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 13.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is a complainant’s customer. Articles and commodities were not being properly supplied by the complainant. That was being of course protested by the persons, including this petitioner and only to justify his misdeed, this petitioner has been involved in this false case which can easily be gathered from the allegation itself. In the morning, part of the offence Rs. 1200/- was taken away from the Cash Box by the petitioner. The matter was not reported but was awaited till evening and then only Rs. 5,000/- was also snatched by the petitioner and that was also not informed to the Police, rather help was taken of a skilled brain to make the case for the offence under Section 392 of I.P.C. also which can never be based for petitioner’s arrest at the moment. In the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 305 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. No. 2736 of 2008, above named petitioner shall 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 C.J.M., Madhubani subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. Shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)