IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3562 of 2011 ANIL BHUIYAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 02/ 17.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. P.P. for the State. Petitioner is named in the first information report on the allegation that on 1.4.2009, he along with FIR named accused persons went to the house of the informant and took away his son who subsequently, did not return to his home. It appears from perusal of the impugned order that after three days of the alleged occurrence informant’s son returned to his home and his statement under section 164 of the Cr. P. C was recorded. Although the victim stated about involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime but submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that parties have already compromised the case and, as a matter of fact, petitioner had falsely been implicated in this case on account of previous enmity which is admitted in the first information report itself. Taking into consideration that there was some previous disputes between the parties and the victim has already returned to his home safely, let petitioner, Anil Bhuiyan, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate. Sherghati at Gaya in Dumariya P.S. Case no.17 of 2009. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)