IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45025 of 2009 MD.AZAD @ AZAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 4.3.2010 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Upendra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case instituted under sections 395 , 397, 412 and 414 of the Indian penal Code. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the first information report and no looted article has been recovered either from his house or his possession. It is also submitted that petitioner has not been put on T.I.P till date. It transpired that during the course of investigation petitioner was named by co-accused Dabloo in his confessional statement recorded by the police and aforesaid co-accused has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court and statement to that effect has been made in paragraph 12 of the petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that several other co-accused persons including co-accused Prem Kumar Rai have been granted bail by a Bench of this Court and one of the order has been appended as annexure-3 to this application. He further states that petitioner is in judicial custody since 20.11.2008. Learned State counsel has pointed out that Bolero Jeep which was allegedly used for the commission of the offence in question was parked near the house of the petitioner. In rebuttal counsel for the petitioner submits that the house in question does not belong to him and to buttress the submission he has invited attention of the court towards annexure-2. Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of the case, let - 2 - the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M, Kishanganj in connection with Kochadhaman P.S. case no. 68 of 2008, subject to the conditions (a) that one of the bailors must be Govt. servant or close family member of the petitioner who will file an affidavit in the court below showing his/her relationship with the petitioner and (b) if the petitioner is found involved in same and similar nature of cases in future, then in that case the informant/prosecution shall be at liberty to file a petition for cancellation of the bail of the petitioner, and if such a petition is filed, the court below would be obliged to dispose of the same in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) M.Rahman