IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.7757 of 2010 JANARDAN SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2 23.03.2010 Heard Mr. Subash Kumar No.1, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. Shaheen Begum, learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken under Sections 147 and 379 of the I.P.C. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that entire occurrence had taken place because of a bonafide land dispute between the parties and there is general allegation of harvesting of paddy crops by the accused persons including the petitioner from the land in dispute. He also submits that for the same occurrence, the complainant had filed a police case against the petitioner and other accused persons and on close of investigation, police has found the entire case to be false and had submitted final report. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a railway employee working at Ludhiyana. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail Be that as it may, in the circumstances, let the petitioner abovenamed, in the even of his arrest/surrender before the court below within four weeks from today be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas in Complaint Case No.359/99 (Tr.No.1590/09) subject to the 2 condition laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. and subject to further conditions that one of the bailors must be Government servant or close family member of the petitioner, who will file an affidavit in the court below showing his relationship with the petitioner and 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 petitioner fails to make Pairvi, then the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner. The court below is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Non- cooperation by the petitioner in early conclusion of trial may be construed as misuse of privilege of bail granted by this Hon’ble Court. V.K. Pandey (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)