IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.23699 of 2011
1. Sushila Devi, wife of Girish Prasad
2. Girish Prasad, Son of Late Mahendra Prasad Singh
Both are residents of village-Rauna Sherpur, P.S.-Balaganj, District-
Gaya. ............Petitioners.
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Kankarbagh Branch, Patna.
..........Opposite Parties.
-----------
2. 20.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel appearing for the State.
The petitioners apprehend arrest in
connection with a case registered for the offence under
sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
The prosecution has alleged that the
petitioners took loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the Bank of
Baroda but the documents submitted by them for
mortgage were subsequently found to be fake.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the Bank after proper verification of the document
as well as inspection of the spot sanctioned the loan to
the petitioner No. 2. Petitioner No. 1 is guarantor of the
said loan.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further
submits that out of Rs. 5,00,000/- the petitioner has
already repaid Rs. 1,50,000/-.
It is further submitted that the petitioners are
ready to make payment of remaining principal amount
2
of the loan within a period of four months.
Taking into consideration the aforesaid
submissions, let the petitioners, namely Sushila Devi
and Girish Prasad in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the Court below within a period of four
weeks from the date of communication of this order, be
enlarged on provisional anticipatory bail for a period of
four months, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/-
(Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Patna in connection with Patrakar Nagar P.S. Case No.
2 of 2011.
In the meantime, the petitioner would make
payment of the entire principal amount of loan to the
concerned bank and file a receipt in token of such
payment before the concerned court in that regard. In
case the petitioner is able to satisfy the court that they
have repaid the entire remaining principal amount in
question, the provisional bail, so granted to the
petitioners, shall be confirmed.
It is made clear that in case within the time
aforesaid, the petitioners fail to comply with the
undertaking given to the court with regard to the
payment the provisional bail so granted shall stands
cancelled and the petitioners may pray thereafter for
3
regular bail, which shall be considered in accordance
with law on its own merit.
Sanjeet/ (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)