IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.12595 of 2010 SAMBHU NATH KAR, resident of 23 H/1B, Bade Raipur Road, Jadavpur, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata-700032 Versus STATE OF BIHAR THRU.C.B.I. ----------- 3/ 02.06.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the C.B.I. Petitioner is an accused in Special Case No. 05 of 2006 arising out of RC 10(A) of 2006 registered under Sections 120 B, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 201 of the I.P.C. read with Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d0 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The petitioner is surveyor of New India Assurance Company Limited, Patna. The prosecution case in short is that the truck carrying assignment from Orissa to Kolkata alleged to have met with an accident. The petitioner was deputed to assess the loss by the Insurance Company. It is alleged that petitioner submitted a false report by including the false copy of the F.I.R., false G.D. entry of the Bagnan P.S., Hawrah regarding the accident. Furthermore, a false test report purported to have been issued by inspection of the testing centre, Kolkata, was also relied upon thereby facilitating for sanctioning the payment in favour of consignment firm M/s Durga Trading Company owned by Sri Ratan Mittal, the petitioner in collusion with others caused loss to the tune of Rs. 2,95,500/- to the Insurance Company. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he made his report on the basis of the First Information Report submitted by the representative of the carrier, as well as of the testing centre. He had no means to verify whether the First Information Report was fake or not. 2 He further submits that he visited the spot and found the truck in question fallen in mud, which had caused damage to the consignment. Learned counsel further submits that the similar allegation was levelled against one Govind Gopal Mukhopadhyay @ G.G. Mukhopadhyay in Special Case no.1 of 2007 arising out of R.C. No. 28(A) of 2006 wherein the allegation was that on the basis of forged First Information Report, the surveyor had made payment. In the aforesaid case, this Court by order dated 05.06.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 21550 of 2008 granted bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has remained in custody for more than 2 ½ months and charge-sheet has already been submitted and as such there is no question of tampering with the evidence. He submits that petitioner will cooperate in the trial. Counsel for the C.B.I. submits that the petitioner has made payment on the basis of a fake First Information Report, which relates to a case of murder and not related to a case of truck accident. He further submits that even the truck carried the consignment on a different number, which belong to a Hero Punch Motorcycle. After hearing the counsel for the parties, it would appear that a fake First Information Report was produced by the carrier of the truck. The number of the truck was not genuine. It further appears that the truck had capsized and some of the cartoons got damaged. The petitioner cannot be held alone responsible for aforesaid acts, which are attributed specifically to others. In the circumstances, petitioner, named above, is directed to 3 be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Special Judicial Magistrate, C.B.I., Patna in connection with RC 10 (A) of 2006 arising out of Special Case no. 05 of 2006 with the condition that he will not physically absent for two consecutive dates at stretch till framing of charge, save and except for valid reasons. Furthermore, one of the bailors should be his own relative. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)