IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.275 of 2009 AMIT KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. M.S. Madhup, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bipin Bihar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Advocate 2 20/4/2009 Petitioner was engaged by the Bank on daily wages for comparing the saving account ledger and to discharge the work of data entry operator. It is the allegation against him that while he was holding that post he got access to the ledger of the Bank and made interpolation in the Bank records and enhanced the deposit amount of his own account to Rs.5,06,000/-. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the First Information Report itself the amount of Rs.5,14,000/- which was withdrawn fraudulently was deposited and only amount of Rs.46,000/- remained with the petitioner as dues and later on the said amount of Rs.46,000/- was also deposited on 4.4.2008 and thereafter the Branch Manager on 26.5.2008 issued a certificate that nothing is due with the petitioner. It is further case of the petitioner that though he is in jail 2 custody for six months but so far he was not produced in the court as provided under section 167(2) Cr.P.C in spite of being asked to be produced. According to him no order has been passed by the Magistrate to remand him from the jail custody so far. Earlier application of the petitioner for bail was dismissed by this court considering the allegation against him. But the petitioner considering himself to be under illegal custody has filed this writ of habeas corpus. We are of the view that habeas corpus petition would not lie in this matter because the petitioner is taken into custody in connection with a criminal case and the matter is before the Magistrate. In such a matter we can only direct the Magistrate to get the petitioner produced in the court but considering the fact that the petitioner is in jail custody for six months and investigation of the case is over, we are of the view that it is a fit case where bail can be granted to the petitioner. All the documentary evidence are with the Investigating Officer. We have also considered the earlier order refusing bail and considered allegations. He is not accused in any other case of similar nature. 3 Earlier order refusing to grant bail was passed two months ago. By this time the Investigating Officer has obtained all the necessary evidence. In the facts and circumstances, we are permitting the counsel for the petitioner to convert this writ petition into a bail application and the petitioner on the application being converted is ordered to be granted bail on executing a bond of Rs..50,000/- with two local sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of concerned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gopalganj in Kuchaikot P.S. Case no.67 of 2008 corresponding G.R. No.916 of 2008 and Trial no.3299 of 2009. While granting bail following conditions shall also be incorporated in the bond that petitioner shall not leave the State of Bihar and he shall be present as and when required by the court or the Investigating Officer and he shall also not directly or indirectly intimidate or influence any of the witnesses of the case. Neyaz/- (J.B. Koshy, CJ.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, CJ.) 4