IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27114 of 2009 CHHOTU DOM Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 04/ 10.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is in custody in a police case under Section 392 of the Penal Code. The submission is that the FIR is against unknown. The inmates of the house one and half months later are alleged to have named the petitioner in paragraph 90 to 93 of the case diary. Learned counsel submits that if the inmates of the house, relatives of the informant had identified the petitioner there was no question of not naming him in the First Information Report itself. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Kadam Kuan P.S. Case No. 444 of 2008. DKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)