IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3663 of 2009 NAGESHWAR SAHNI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Lalita Devi ----------- 2/ 23.06.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner was allowed bail by the learned Sessions Judge but he could not appear due to his remaining away for his livelihood, that mean to say that on merit petitioner was entitled for bail. If his presence was not intentional and beyond his control that can be decided by the Court where the case is pending. So, he is directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for bail justifying his non-appearance for the period from the order of Sessions Judge and if that appears sufficient, he shall be released on bail by the Lower Court itself without being prejudiced by this rejection order. Accordingly, with the above observations the prayer made by the petitioner is rejected. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)