IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20794 of 2009 KARU DAS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03 26.08.2009 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, informant and State. Sole petitioner has approached this court seeking bail in a case instituted under Sections 364 and 120B of the Penal Code. As per allegation in the complaint, on 15.07.2006, the petitioner took the son of the informant to some place in U.P. for employment. The boy did not return. It is the case in the complaint itself that the complainant had a talk with the boy on few occasions. The complaint was lodged on 22.12.2008, which was later treated as an F.I.R. on 08.02.2009. Allegation is that on several occasions the informant tried to query the petitioner but no satisfactory reply was coming with regard to whereabouts of the son. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is inordinate delay in lodging the case. Referring to the statements of Mill owner and Manager contained in paragraph nos. 15, 18 and 21 of the case diary, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they deposed to the effect that this boy had taken certain advances (amount) from them and without payment thereof he left the job. 2 Petitioner appears to be in custody since 09.02.2009. Looking to the entire aspects of the matter, this court is persuaded to admit the petitioner to bail. Let the petitioner, namely, Karu Das, 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 C.J.M. Nawadah in connection with Rajauli P.S.Case no. 19/09, subject to the condition that one of the bailors should be the own/close family member of the petitioner. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)