IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41356 of 2009 1. SANJAY KUMAR, SON OF SRI RAMJI PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARI BAZAR, P.O. & P.S. GOPALGANJ, DISTRICT GOPALGANJ 2. BHOLA SAH @ BHOLA JEE, SON OF SRI SHANKAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DUMARBANA, P.O. & P.S. PAKRIDAYAL, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN……………………………………...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CABINET VIGILANCE…………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTY ----------- 3. 21.12.2009 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the Vigilance. The case is under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case of the prosecution is that when the Special Executive Magistrate visited the hotel in which petitioners were sitting and taking tea, he was offered a bribe of Rs.50,000/-. He informed the authorities and they arrived at the hotel and caught petitioners red-handed along with bundle of notes. It is stated that bribe was offered by petitioners to get their goods released. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the reason why the Special Executive Magistrate has visited the hotel is not at all disclosed in the F.I.R. nor it is anywhere stated in the case diary. He - 2 - submits that goods were to be released by the Collector and the Special Executive Magistrate had no role in the same to play. He also submits that goods were later on released by the Collector finding that no offence was made out. Copy of the order passed by the Collector is Annexure-4. Petitioners are in judicial custody since 8.9.2009. It is not clear either from the F.I.R. or from the case diary as to why the Special Executive Magistrate had visited the hotel on his own. Considering the above facts and circumstances, this application is allowed. Let petitioners namely, Sanjay Kumar and Bhola Sah @ Bhola Jee, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge (Vigilance) Muzaffarpur in connection with Special Case No.31/2009 arising out of Motihari Town P.S. Case No.302/09 with conditions as laid down in sub-section (3) of section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as may be - 3 - applicable and also that one of the bailors shall be a close relation of the petitioners. In case of breach of any of the conditions at any stage to the satisfaction of the concerned court below, it shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners and take steps for their arrest. It is made clear that petitioners shall appear on each and every date personally and shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent without prior permission of the court failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel their bail bonds and take steps for their arrest. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)