IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32478 of 2008 GUDDU KUMAR @ LAKESH S/o Binod Singh, resident of village Kewtar, P. S. – Makhdumpur, District – Jehanabad ………………….. Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ……………. Opp. Party --------------- 2 21.10.2008 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make correction in paragraph 21 of the petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The case is under Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The kidnapped boy Vivek Kumar was recovered by the police and his statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C in which he has named accused persons who had played different roles at different places in the process of his kidnapping. One Guddul is one of the accused the named. This petitioner is Guddu Kumar @ Lakesh. It is said that this petitioner is not named in the 164 statement as to have played any role in kidnapping and concealment of the victim boy. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced the certified copy of order dated 8.1.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 41618 of 2007 and another case from which it transpires that one Chandan Kumar who has been named by the victim boy in the 164 statement has been allowed bail by this Court. If the Guddul named in the 164 is a different person, then this petitioner has a better case than the said Chandan Kumar. It is stated that the petitioner had not been put on TIP and not identified by the victim boy. It is also said that the - 2 - petitioner is in custody since 12.03.2008 and has no criminal antecedents. In the circumstances, the court below shall verify the name of the petitioner from the 164 statements, and if he is not Guddul mentioned therein, he shall enlarged the petitioner namely, Guddu Kumar @ Lakesh on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Muffasil P. S. Case No. 74 of 2007. Kundan (J. N. Singh, J.)