Allowed

Rajiv Kumar Ambasta v. The State Of Bihar Through The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Vigilance, Investigation Bureau, Pa

Patna HC11 Dec 2017CR. MISC./57952/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail in a vigilance case involving allegations under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act. Ordered release on bail upon arrest or surrender within six weeks subject to furnishing bonds and strict conditions regarding cooperation and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner to be released upon arrest/surrender within six weeks subject to sureties and specified conditions.

Rajiv Kumar Ambasta Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Deputy… — Corruption | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.57952 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -20 Year- 2017 Thana -VIGILANCE District- PATNA

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rajiv Kumar Ambasta, son of Shri Sitaram Prasad, Resident of MohallaBishnupur Mahmadpur Road, Ward No. 43, P.S.- Begusarai Town, DistrictBegusarai.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Through The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Investigation Bureau, Patna.

¶8

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rama Kant Sharma,L.O, I/C Vig.

¶11

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 11-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends arrest in Vigilance P.S. Case

¶13

No. 20 of 2017, arising out of Special Case No. 15 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 109,409,420,467,468,471,120B of the IPC and Section 13(2), and 13(1) (C ) (D) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶14

In the written report, there is allegation against the petitioner that being the head clerk at the relevant time, endorsed the wrong recommendation of the accused Sudha Kumari, Establishment Clerk of the D.R.D.A Office, Begusarai and on the basis of endorsement of the petitioner the D.D.C. passed order for giving benefit of A.C.P. to seven employees of District Rural Development Agency, Begusarai.

¶15

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57952 of 2017 (2) dt.11-12-2017

¶16

2/3

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the employees who received the benefit of A.C.P. on the basis of photo stat copy of letter no.2725 dated 21.03.2007 have returned the excess amount. He further submits that other accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 07.09.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 40833 of 2017.

¶18

Counsel for the Vigilance appeared and opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶19

In such circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 20 of 2017 to the satisfaction of learned Court of Special Judge Vigilance 1^st , Patna subject to condition as laid down u/S 438 (2) of the Cr. P.C. with further conditions (1) (bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every dated fixed by the court and absence on two

¶20

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57952 of 2017 (2) dt.11-12-2017

¶21

3/3

¶22

consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason, will automatically cancel bail bonds of the petitioner and (3) if the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

¶23

(Sanjay Priya, J)

¶24

khushbu/-

¶25

U T

Rajiv Kumar Ambasta v. The State Of Bihar Through The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Vigilance, Investigation Bureau, Pa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Kumar Ambasta v. The State Of Bihar Through The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Vigilance, Investigation Bureau, Pa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irawati Devi @ Indrawati Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Amrendra Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Suresh Ram Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Rajesh Kumar and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Binoda Nand Rai and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Shambhu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar