IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16335 of 2010 SURAJ SAH, SON OF SUNDESHWAR SAH @ SUNDESHWAR SAHU Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 18.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 25(1-B) A and 26 of the Arms Act. It has been submitted that for recovery of one country made pistol and a live cartridge, the petitioner has remained in custody since 31.1.2010 and apart from this, and another Case i.e. Biroul P.S. Case No. 17 of 2010 instituted against unknown for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. In view of such, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Biroul at Benipur, Distt. Darbhanga, in Biroul P.S. Case No. 18 of 2010 subject to the following conditions: (i)That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in address of the petitioner. (ii)That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is an accused in Biroul P.S. 2 Case No. 17 of 2010 besides the present case and in case he is an accused in any other case, he shall not be released on bail. This fact will be verified by the Magistrate before releasing the petitioner on bail. (iii)That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse. (iv)That the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. (v) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled. The Magistrate is directed to consider amalgamation of the present case in Biroul P.S. Case No. 17 of 2010 since both the cases are inter connected in view of Section 220 Cr. P.C. S.Ali ( Anjana Prakash, J.)