IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27338 of 2010 MITHUN KUMAR @ SAH @ MITHIN KUMAR son of Sri Krishna Prasad @ Sah, resident of village Belaganj, P.O./Police Station Belaganj, District Gaya… … … Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar… …Opposite Party For the Petitioner: Mr. Bharat Lal, Advocate For the State: Mr. Suraj Pd. Singh, APP … 3 07.10.2010 A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner clarifying his stand with regard to the stand taken in paragraph 2 of this application. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for offences under Sections 448 and 384/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as per the allegation, the petitioner along with others demanded Rangadari and tried to kidnap the son of the informant. It is alleged that the same could not succeed as the people of the locality assembled there. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it has come during the course of investigation that the petitioner has been implicated on ground of some - 2 - sort of love affair. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 28.04.2010 and so far his antecedent is concerned, he has been implicated in another case being Kotwali Police Station Case No. 194/08, however, in that case bail has been granted to the petitioner. It is also submitted that neither any extortion money has been alleged to have been given to the petitioner nor, in fact, kidnapping had taken place. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the boy, who was tried to have been kidnapped, has given statement before the police. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, MITHUN KUMAR @ SAH @ MITHIN KUMAR, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah in connection with Nawadah Town Police Station Case No. 176/10 with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be his father. That apart, the petitioner, after his release in this case, is again found implicated in similar - 3 - nature of cases, then the concerned court would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. SC (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)