IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34822 of 2009 RAJU BAITHA son of Dudhnath Baitha, resident of village- Bensagar, Police Station- Karakat (Gorari), District- Rohtas at Sasaram … Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 27.10.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Normally in an offence under Section 395 I.P.C. the identification of an unnamed accused in the FIR must inspire confidence so as to pinpoint his involvement in the alleged offence. Here the only identification of the petitioner by two of the witnesses as recorded in paragraph 122 and 123 of the case-diary to say the least is not only unsustainable but also perfunctory. The two witnesses infact have only said that when they came to know that the police was going to escort the petitioner on 1.6.2009 from the police custody to the court, they had gone on the connected road and could identify both the petitioner to have participated in the occurrence on 26.2.2009. Apart from this, there is no other material against the petitioner. It has also been categorically asserted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the strength of paragraph 13 2 of the bail application, that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Considering aforementioned facts and circumstances and taking into account that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent this Court would direct for release of the petitioner namely Raju Baitha, on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of SDJM, Bikramganj, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Nashriganj P. S. Case No. 42 of 2009, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors will be a close family relative of the petitioner and that the petitioner would remain present in course of trial and his absence on two consecutive dates will entail automatic consequence of cancellation of his bail in this case. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)