IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1305 of 2011 DILIP KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 11.05.2011. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 01.10.2009 in a case registered under Sections 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 412 of the I.P.C. It is alleged that on confession of the petitioner one Bicycle was recovered. Though it has wrongly been mentioned as motor cycle in the impugned order as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said Bicycle was released in favour of the accused. Karu. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and there is no recovery from his possession and he has been identified by informant 2 only and has no criminal antecedent. The aforesaid contentions of the petitioner have not been controverted by the learned counsel for the State after going through the case diary. Considering the aforesaid submissions, let the petitioner, above named, 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Barh, in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 290 of 2009. The impugned order reflects that no witness has been produced in spite of charges being framed but the learned court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner if the petitioner defaults for three consecutive occasions during trial or gets involved in similar nature of offence. U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)