IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9102 of 2009 RAMANAND RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 15.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that it was Birendra Rai with whom informant’s son was working. His shop was in Orissa. In lieu thereof he was receiving Rs. 1,000/- per month that was stopped two months earlier. Thereafter there is allegation of taking of informant’s thumb impression with the help of this petitioner but signed paper is not used anywhere. According to learned counsel it is not a case of kidnapping, not of section 364 IPC, nor further section 3(i) (x) S.C./S.T. Act is applicable as there was no occasion to coming to the petitioner for the second time because of reason that differences could be in between Birendra Rai and the informant. Place of abuse is also not given though that has been leveled against all and informant has compromised with Birendra Rai, the main accused. So no question arises about petitioner’s arrest for the allegation leveled against him. I agree with the submission. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today in S.C./S.T.Hajipur P.S.Case No.69 of 2002, the above named - 2 - petitioner shall 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hajipur, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI