IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21099 of 2009 SHIVJEE YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 18.12.2009 Heard. The original F.I.R. was under sections 395 and 376 of Indian Penal Code and Section 376 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code was also added. Bail prayer of this appellant was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 24.09.2008 under Cr. Miscellaneous No. 22442 of 2008(Annnexure-1) on the ground that on the confessional statement of this petitioner that looted articles were recovered from his house and that the recovered articles were put on T.I.P. which were identified by the informant. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits hat in this case the two seizure list witnesses have been examined and their evidence is at Annexure-3 and 3/1. It is pointed out that these two seizure witnesses turned hostile and they did not support the factum of recovery before the trial court. Today, the copy of deposition of informant and his wife examined as P.Ws. 3 and 4 before the trial court have been filed with supplementary affidavit, it is pointed out from the evidence of the informant and his wife that these two witnesses have stated that they had not 2 identified the said articles in the T.I.P. The learned counsel also submits that none of the witnesses has said anything about any allegation under 376. It is submitted that the evidence of four witnesses have been recorded with the trial court after rejection of the bail prayer of the petitioner vide this Court’s order dated 24.09.2008. The learned A.P.P. does not dispute the evidence as adduced by prosecution during trial. In the facts and circumstances o the case, the petitioner, Shivjee Yadav is admitted to bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10, 000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-XIII, Patna, in S.Tr. No. 297 of 2008, arising out of Phulwarisharif P.S. Case No. 385 of 2007. (C.M. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-