IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12735 of 2011 SHEO NATH RAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02/ 03.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. P.P. for the State. Alleged occurrence took place in the year 1997 but the petitioner could be remanded in this case on 6.7.2010 but the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not aware of the institution of the present case nor any process was ever served upon the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not named in the first information report but in course of investigation, name of this petitioner came in the statement of one witness, namely, Jitani Devi which is evident from para 37 of the case diary. It appears that the aforesaid Jitani Devi came to know about the name of the petitioner from the mouth of culprits at the time of alleged occurrence but it is surprisingly enough that the aforesaid Jitani Devi signed the first information report as witness but she did not disclose the above stated fact at the time of recording the fardbeyan of the informant. Taking into consideration the above stated facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner, Sheo Nath Ram, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Addl. Sessions Judge VIII, Patna in Sessions Trial no. 38/2011 arising out of Punpun P.S. Case no. 80/1997. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)