IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.21271 of 2011
Onkar Yadav son of Awadh Yadav, resident of
village-Jhajh, P.S.Barachatti, Dist.-Gaya
Versus
The State o Bihar
-----------
2. 6.7.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Barachatti
P.S. Case No.124 of 2011 registered for the offence under sections
384, 385 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has
prayed for grant of bail in which allegation has been leveled that the
petitioner and others had taken some amount from the beneficiaries
for construction of Indra Niwas at the time of making payment of
Rs.15,000/- as also at the time while the amount was being
deposited in the account of the beneficiaries.
Learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention
towards definition of extortion as defined in section 383 of the
Indian Penal Code. He further submits that from a bare perusal of
definition of extortion it is apparent that ingredients of sections 384
and 385 of the Indian Penal Code are missing in the present case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submits that in absence of
ingredients of sections 384 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code, there
would be no application of section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail
on the ground mentioned in the first information report and in the
impugned order.
Taking into consideration the submissions made on
2
behalf of the parties, let the petitioner, namely, Onkar Yadav in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the court below, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Sub.Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati (Gaya) in connection
with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 124 of 2011.
Md.S. ( Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)