IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45958 of 2009 1. ABDUL JALIL 2. Md. Alauddin Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 4/ 17.03.2010 Heard Mr. Nazmul Hoda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Ram Priya Saran Singh, learned Addl. P.P. for the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest for various offences including offences under sections 467, 468, 409 and 120B of the Penal Code as also section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. From perusal of the F.I.R., vide Annexure-1, it appears that a Vigilance Team was constituted for examining irregularities committed by the P.D.S. dealers in distribution of food grains among the red-card holders. In the F.I.R. several P.D.S. dealers, including these two petitioners have been arrayed in the category of accused. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the several other accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail or regular bail by different Benches of this Court. One of the orders has been annexed as Annexure-2, showing therein that one of the co-accused, Arun Kumar was granted anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court by order dated 21.03.2007. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer - 2 - for anticipatory bail on the ground that these two petitioners have been absconding for quite long time. However, learned State counsel fairly conceded that if the petitioners are prepared to deposit entire defalcated amount, then their prayer for anticipatory bail may be considered favourably. From perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is allegation of embezzlement of Rs. 64,128. 52. In the aforesaid backgrounds, if the petitioners, namely, Abdul Jalil and Md. Alauddin, deposit the aforesaid amount in the court below within a period of six weeks from today and if the court below is satisfied about the said deposit after verifying the records then in that case in the event of arrest or surrender within the aforesaid period, the petitioners, above named, shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pupri at Sitamarhi in Sursand P.S. Case No. 88 of 2000, subject to the conditions (a) that one of the bailors must be government servant or close family members of the petitioner who will file an affidavit in the court below showing his/her relationship with the petitioners, (b) if the petitioners are found involved in same and similar nature of cases in future, then in that case the informant/ - 3 - prosecution shall be at liberty to file a petition for cancellation of the bail of the petitioners, and if such a petition is filed, the court below would be obliged to dispose of the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned and (c) the petitioner shall make regular pairvi in the court below in the present case either by appearing himself in person or through representation by his lawyer on each and every dates, and if on two consecutive dates petitioners fail to make pairvi, then the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioners. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J ) BTiwary/