IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42557 of 2009 AMIT KUMAR GUPTA SON OF SATENDRA PD. GUPTA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 18/01/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 385, 387 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Pursuant to the order dated 9.12.2009 wherein it had been noted that even though the petitioner’s phone had been used, the Informant had identified the voice of Vinod Painter who demanded Rangdari from the Informant, the case diary has been called for and in Paragraph 2 of the case diary, this fact has been noted. In view of the material as also that the petitioner is an accused in only one of the case, as per the report, let the petitioner above named, who is in custody since 11.12.2008 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Dehari P.S. Case No. 361 of 2008 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. (ii)That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that 2 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. (iii)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. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J.)