IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19890 of 2010 1. MUKESH YADAV, S/O Tulsi Yadav resident of village- Bhaluka,P.S.Barhat, District-Jamui. 2. Ghutur Yadav, son of Gajo Yadav, resident of village- Khairma, P.S. Jamui, District-Jamui. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 23.6.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to make appropriate correction in the Police Station in relation to petitioner no.1 from Jamui to Barhat. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioners are accused in connection with G.R.P Kiul P.S. Case No. 03/2010 for offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The substance of allegation against the petitioners is of snatching of some ornaments from the wife of the informant while she was sitting in a train compartment. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that neither the petitioners have been put on T.I. parade nor there has been any recovery from their possession and that the petitioners have clean antecedent. Having regard to the circumstances aforesaid, let the petitioners, namely (1) Mukesh Yadav and (2) Ghutur Yadav be released on bail upon each of them 2 furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kiul in connection with G.R.P. Kiul P.S. Case No. 03/2010, subject to the following conditions :- (1) That the father of the two petitioners would be one of the bailors for each of them and who would be duty bound to inform the Court below in case these petitioners are found involved in any further case of similar nature after their release and whereupon the Court below would be at liberty to initiate proceedings for cancellation of the bail bond of the concerned petitioners and for taking them into judicial custody. (2) The petitioners would ensure their representation before the Court below on each and every date fixed and upon failure of either of the petitioners to ensure his representation in the Court below on two consecutive dates, without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the court below would confer liberty on the Court concerned, to initiate proceedings for cancellation of the bail bonds of the defaulting petitioner and for taking him into custody. Anand Kr. (Jyoti Saran, J.)