IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15902 of 2010 RAHUL KUMAR @ RAHUL KUMAR SAH, Son of Sagar Sah, resident of village – Prataptanr, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Vaishali ….. Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR …. Opposite Party ----------- For the petitioner : M/s Ganpati Trivedi & Satya Prakash Sinha Advocates For the State : Mr. S.N.shukla, A.P.P. 9 27.10.2010 This application has been filed by the petitioner for modification of order dated 22.3.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9406 of 2010, whereby the petitioner was granted bail on the term and condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be the close relative of the petitioner. Petitioner has stated in this petition that his name and address is actually Md. Raunak Ali @ Md. Raunak, Son of Md. Taliv @ Md. Taliv Hussain at village Paharpur Kothi, Chakabdulla, P.O. Dihuli, P.s. Sakra, District Muzaffarpur. However, the police has remanded him in the name of Rahul Kumar, Son of Sagar Sah of village Prataptanr, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Vaishali. In above view of the matter though his actual name is Md. Raunak Ali @ Md. Raunak, 2 however, he had filed Cr. Misc. No. 9406/2010 in the name of Rahul Kumar. It is urged that this fact has also stands stated in paragraph no. 12 of the aforesaid application. Thus, in above view of the matter since the parentage of Rahul Kumar and Md. Raunak Ali @ Md. Raunak are different, the parents of the petitioner are not in a position to produce themselves as a bailor to the petitioner. The petitioner has filed several documents with his supplementary affidavit to show that his real name and parentage including the voter identity card of his father, copies of accounts, Life Insurance Policies etc. and residential certificate granted by the authority concerned. State of Bihar has also filed affidavit and stated that at the time of arrest the petitioner has disclosed his name as Rahul Kumar in place of Md. Raunak Ali. Therefore, he was produced and remanded in that name. However, upon verification by the Superintendent of Police,, Vaishial at Hajipur through the I.O. of the case, it has transpired that the real name and particulars of the petitioner is Md. Raunak Ali and Son of Md. Talib resident of village Paharpur Kothi, Chakabdulla, P.O. Dihuli, P.S. Sakra, 3 District Muzaffarpur. However, it has been stated that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent in the name of Md. Raunak Ali in Sakra P.S. Case No. 27 of 2005 in a case of similar nature. Second supplementary affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner annexing therewith copy of Criminal Revision No. 185 of 2009 filed by this petitioner before the District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur against the order dated 8.5.2009, remanding the petitioner in the name of Rahul Kumar. However, the aforesaid Criminal Revision was also dismissed. At the time of hearing of this case on 14.7.2010, it was noticed that the petitioner has stated in paragraph no. 15 of the earlier application (Cr. Misc. No. 9406 of 2010) that his antecedent is clean. However, an affidavit sworn on behalf of the State showing his involvement in another case. It has been urged on behalf of the petitioner that it was merely a mistake committed by him inadvertently and the fact is that he has been granted bail in the aforesaid case. This was also noticed by this Court that the deponent of this case claims to be Md. Talib @ Md. Taliv 4 Hussain, Son of Late Motiur Rahman in the affidavit filed in this case, wherein in the earlier bail application (Cr. Misc. No. 9406/2010) he has described himself as Sagar Sah, Son of Late Rama Sah, while describing him as father of the petitioner. In above view of the matter, notices were issued to the petitioner, deponent and the person who has identified the affidavit and show cause. In response of that, show cause has been filed on their behalf. It has been stated in the show cause filed on behalf of the petitioner that there was no intention to withhold the truth and the petition was filed in the name of Rahul Kumar as he has been remanded by the police in such name. However, it is stated that this fact has been described in paragraph no. 12 of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has brought this fact to the notice of the court below but his prayer could not find favour and a criminal revision bearing Cr. Revision No. 185/2009 filed in this regard was also dismissed. Thus, it has been submitted that petitioner all along was trying to get the matter clarified but some how and the 5 other it could not happen . So far the criminal antecedent is concerned, it is submitted that was inadvertently done and the mistake was on the part of the pairvikar of the petitioner who was assisting in filing the bail application. However, it has been stated that the petitioner has been released on bail in the other case. Petitioner has tendered unqualified apology. Similarly the father of the petitioner has also filed show cause stating therein that the mistake was not intentional at all rather in confusion and under wrong advise he has sworn affidavit in the name of Sagar Sah father of Rahul as the petitioner was remanded in the same name and parentage . He has also tendered unqualified apology. The Advocate Clerk concerned, who has identified the deponent, has also filed a show cause and has stated that since he could not doubt the identity of the father of the accused, mistake has been committed by him, which is not deliberate rather unintentional. I have heard Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, and learned counsel appearing for the State. . It has been submitted by him that the mistake 6 has been committed by the petitioner and his father only due to confusion as the petitioner has been remanded in the name of Rahul Kumar son Sagar Sah, resident of village Prataptanr, P.S. Bhagwnpur, District Vaishali under the wrong advise a petition has been filed in that name and also the affidavit has been sworn by mistake. The mistake has been committed by the desperate father, whose son was in jail. Similarly, it has been stated that the Advocate Clerk has in routine manner has identified and definitely committed a mistake but was not deliberate rather unintentional. In above view of the matter it has been urged that they may be condoned. Upon consideration of the materials on record and show cause submitted by the relevant persons as well as counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, it is apparent that the petitioner has been remanded in the name of Raunak Kumar Son of Sagar Sah of village Prataptanr, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Vaishali. However, his real name is Md. Raunak Ali @ Md. Raunak, Son of Md. Taliv @ Md. Taliv Hussain at village Paharpur Kothi, Chakabdulla, P.O. Dihuli, P.S. 7 Sakra, District Muzaffarpur, which stands stated in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State . This is also fact that the aforesaid fact stands described in paragraph 12 of the bail application. However, there is no doubt that the father of the petitioner has sworn affidavit in the name of Sagar Sah in the earlier application and the Advocate Clerk has identified him. The aforesaid act amounts to misconduct on the part of the petitioner, his father as well as Advocate Clerk concerned. However, this is also apparent that the petitioner was granted bail on 22.3.2010 but he has remained in custody for further seven months as he could not be released. Thus, in above view of the show cause submitted and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner as well as his father and the concerned Advocate Clerk is warned to remain cautious in future. Let the bail granted to the petitioner in the name of Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Sah vide order dated 22.3.2010 be deemed to have been passed with respect to this petitioner namely, Md. Raunak Ali @ Md. Raunak, Son of Md. Taliv @ Md. Taliv Hussain at 8 village Paharpur Kothi, Chakabdullah, P.O. Dihuli, P.S. Sakra, District Muzaffarpur since the State of Bihar has also sworn affidavit that the real name and identity of petitioner is as aforesaid. However, it is made clear that the court below would proceed in accordance with law without being prejudiced by any finding or observation recorded in the present order. Accordingly this application stands disposed of. Spd/- ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)