IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17450 of 2011 JAGESHWAR MARANDI, SON OF LATE KANER MARANDI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MARHATRI, P.S. PHULIDUMAR, DISTRICT-BANKA………PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH VIGILANCE…………. ……………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Hemendra Prasad, Advocate. For the Vigilance Deptt. : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Law Officer Vigilance. ----------- 2. 20.5.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the Vigilance Department. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections 7/13(2) read with Section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. As per allegation, after the order of the Appellate Authority in favour of the complainant, the petitioner had relegated him to the Panchayat Secretary who, allegedly demanded bribe and while taking bribe, he was caught red handed. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that neither there is allegation of demanding bribe nor any 2 bribe amount has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he had relegated the complainant to the Panchayat Secretary. Learned counsel for the Vigilance Department has submitted that the petitioner could have relegated the complainant to the Panchayat Secretary only for the purpose of taking bribe. However, learned counsel for the petitioner confronts this limb of argument and submits that there is no allegation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the said occurrence. The petitioner is stated to be in custody since 22.2.2011. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, Jageshwar Marandi, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Vigilance-II, Patna, in connection with Special Case No.10 of 2011, arising out of Vigilance Case No.14 of 2011, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be the close relative or his family member, who will file affidavit before the court below giving full genealogy showing his or her relationship with the petitioner. If the petitioner fails to 3 remain present on two consecutive dates during the course of the trial without any reasonable cause being shown, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. P.S. ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)