IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12418 of 2011 BHARAT RAO AND ANR. Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 4 30.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the state. Petitioners are not named in the first information report and their name surfaced in this case in confessional statement of co-accused, Sk Hakim. Admittedly, the victim has already recovered but no TIP has been done. It appears that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has observed that the victim has been recovered on the basis of disclosure made by the petitioners but learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the aforesaid recovery has been made on the basis of statement given by co-accused, Sk. Hakim which is evident from Paragraph-12 of the case diary. It is further contended by him that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case at the instance of one, Ajay Rai who happens to be close to co- accused, Sk. Hakim. It is contended by him that as a matter of fact, the daughter of above-said Ajay Rai eloped with petitioner No. 2 and subsequently, aforesaid Ajay Rai lodged a case against lover of his daughter as well as others including petitioner No. 2 and that is the reason of false implication of the petitioners. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and 2 circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties, let the petitioners, namely, Bharat Rao and Pappu Rao @ Babloo Rao @ Abhay Rao be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 170 of 2010 to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul (in-charge) at Motihari. AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)