IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30245 of 2008 MAKHAN MANSURI @ SIRAJUDDIN MANSURI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 11.8.2008 Heard. Learned Judge, who was hearing the prayer for bail, does not appear properly trained in bail jurisprudence inspite of sufficient directions issued by the High court from different Benches as to what could be the approach of a Judge while hearing a prayer for bail. Prayer for bail of the petitioner has been dismissed by the Sessions Judge Incharge, Bhabua by recording agreement with the submission made by the learned P.P. The submission recorded in para-5 of the rejection order indicates that the “ investigation was not far behind ” , hence, it was not a fit case for granting bail. How could a Judge be trained, this court finds extremely impoossibe and difficult to prescribe unless he is ready to get trained. The Court has gone hoarse in pointing to the courts below that it is never the sections of the offences rather the facts of the case and, specially, the specific individual allegations which determine the granting or rejection of bail. I have invariably come across that the learned Sessions Judge, In charge, Bhabua, has been rejecting prayers for bail on grounds which could be extraneous to his jurisdiction and could never be relevant for the purpose. This gives an impression to this Court as if the learned Judge acts under a whim. The rejection order does not indicate that there was any material in the case diary or on record to refuse the prayer for bail. - 2 - Let petitioner named above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua), in connection with Mohania P.S. case no.333 of 2007. sudip ( Dharnidhar Jha, J )