IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23375 of 2008 GOBARDHAN MANJHI & KUNDAN KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 7.8.2008 None appears for the petitioners. I have heard the learned A.P.P. who has referred to me some of the paragraphs of the case diary specially 9 and 10. The petitioners are not named in the FIR of a case under Section 396 IPC. The Additional Judge who rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioners has devoided of some space in his rejection order on discussing even the place of occurrence but has not been able to point out that what could be the material for refusing the prayer for bail of the two petitioners. The learned Additional P.P. referred to the above two paragraphs consisting of the statements of Hawaldar Mishri Lal Manjhi and constable, Bishnu Pd. Singh who have claimed to identify five accused persons including the two petitioners. The time of occurrence is 8 P.M. on 1.7.2005 and the FIR was lodged three hours thereafter. The police personnel examined in paragraphs 9 and 10 who have claimed to identify the two petitioners very much as may - 2 - appear from their statements after the occurrence at the seen of the occurrence but curiously enough they did not appear incorrecting the informing either the police officer or the informant that he indeed identified any accused persons. This could be the circumstance for directing the release of the two petitioners. Let the above named two petitioners on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.D.J.VII, Patna in S.Tr.No.1050 of 2007(Malsalami P.S.Case no.98 of 2005). B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )