IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19710 of 2009 PURUSHOTTAM MAHARAJ Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 13.7.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Vigilance. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are two types of allegations in the case, though, petitioner has no concern with any of them. There are some of the allotments were used or expended for what they were meant even direction not to expend the same and in some of that the expenditure shown by in execution of the scheme was apprehending excessive. Two of the similar cases for other schemes were filed in which petitioner was allowed bail as of having no hand and in the present case also there is no allegation of misappropriation. If there is any, then also i.e., not established as enquiry officer shows his inability in fixing any liability, the matter is under investigation. In the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, the petitioner Purushottam Maharaj shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, North Bihar, Muzaffarpur in connection with Patna Vigilance Case No. 59 of 2008 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. However, at the stage of hearing and charge, the materials - 2 - collected by the Investigating Agency shall be taken into consideration to justify the petitioner’s bail. U.K. (Mandhata Singh,J)