IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26020 of 2010 SK.RAMJAN ALI S/O LATE SK. MOFIL HUSSAIN, AT PRESENT MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ NIMA, VILLAGE-NAYA TOLA, BAHADURPUR, P.S. MANIHARI, DISTRICT-KATIHAR. --PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --OPP.PARTY 3 03.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri Ashutosh Jha for complainant who also filed counter affidavit today. Petitioner is one of the named accused in this protest complaint case. Initially one complaint had been filed by the complainant which was sent before Police under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure giving rise to Manihari P.S. Case no. 90 of 2008 wherein Police, after investigation, submitted final form stating mistake of fact. Final form was accepted after hearing the complainant- informant but matter proceeded on the protest complaint wherein cognizance has also been taken. The petitioner, being Mukhiya, carries allegations leveled by the complainant, being Deputy Mukhiya of the same Panchayat, that at the hands of petitioner some sort of irregularities have been committed in connection with Indira Awas Yojna and 2 other schemes of Central Government. One more case being Manihari P.S. Case no. 39 of 2008 is instituted at the hands of one Gopal Singh against the complainant as per learned counsel for the complainant here it is due to collusion of Police authorities and the present petitioner, the case instituted on the statement of Gopal Singh has been instituted much earlier than the case instituted on the complaint filed by him and because of such collusion Police submitted final form whereas one committee found by local administration on the complaint received through Chief Minister Office also finds irregularities committed by the petitioner. No doubt, reference of such Committee also appears mentioned in order of the learned Sessions Judge but considering the facts, nature of allegations etc., the petitioner, in the event of arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Randhir Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, first class, Katihar, in Complaint Case no. 1147 of 2009, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with additional condition that the 3 petitioner shall remain present on each and every date before the court below for three years or till the disposal of the case, whichever is earlier. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation the privilege granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.) AAhmad