IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11630 of 2011 SANJAY SINGH, son of Munglal Singh, village Sambhua, PS Mahandiya, District Arwal – Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 30.5.2011 The petitioner is seeking bail in a case under section 302 and other allied sections of the Penal Code. The trial has commenced in this case. Nine witnesses including the informant has been examined. The dispute seems to be with respect to possession of property belonging to the deceased between the two sisters. The allegation is that Sanjay Singh, the husband of one of the sister had fired on his father-in- law resulting in his death. The witnesses on examination have stated that they did not see the person who fired. It is, therefore, submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he should be released on bail considering that he has been in custody for about two years. The Investigating Officer and the doctor are to be examined in this case. All the eye witnesses and the FIR witnesses have been examined who have denied that they have stated that the petitioner had fired on the deceased. Some of them say that they have seen him running away from the P.O. The veracity of the statement aforesaid will be judged by the trial court. I accordingly direct that the petitioner should be released on bail in Obra PS Case No. 115/2009, giving rise to S.T. No. 63/2010, on furnishing bail bond of rupees ten thousand with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the 2 F.T.C. II, Aurangabad with the conditions that one of the bailer should be his wife and the other bailer his father/mother/brother, if alive. The wife, father and mother should state on affidavits that they undertake to produce the petitioner on each and every date during the pendency of the trial and if he absents even for a single date without cause, they will be held responsible. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)