IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11605 of 2010 RAJU SINGH RATHOR @ SURENDRA NARAYAN SINGH, Son of Late Chetnarayan Singh @ Chetan Singh, R/o village Dehlawa, P.S. Rohaniya, District Varanasi, State U.P. Versus STATE OF BIHAR … Opposite Party ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. S.N.P.Sinha, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. U.S.P.Singh, A.P.P. ---- 2 04.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for offences punishable under Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. It is submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner is stated to be in custody since 29.7.2009. It is further contended that as per the allegation set up in the first information report the ingredients of Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code are not made out and at best this would be a case of Section 385 of Indian Penal Code, which is a bailable offence. Learned counsel for the State submits that it would be evident from the order of the Sessions Judge that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent. However, having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, RAJU SINGH RATHOR @ SURENDRA - 2 - NARAYAN SINGH, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah (West Champaran) in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 16 of 2005, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be a close relative or family member of the petitioner, who shall file affidavit before the concerned court giving complete genealogy to show his or her relationship with the petitioner. If, after his release in this case, the petitioner is again found implicated in similar nature of cases, then the concerned court would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. Further, the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during the course of trial. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation then the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioner. Spd/- ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J. )