IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12715 of 2010 BIRDAN YADAV, Son of Late Parmanand Yadav, Resident of village Mayapur, P.S. Goh, District Aurangabad ……… Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR … Opposite Party ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Punam Shrivastava Advocate For the State : Mr. Uma Shankar Pd. Singh, A.P.P. 3 12.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 452, 427, 380/120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act and 17 of C.L.A. Act. It is submitted that though the petitioner is agnate of the informant, however, he has not been named in the first information report and except the confessional statement of co-accused Gorelal Yadav allegedly recorded by the police, no material could be collected during the course of investigation indicating towards complicity of this petitioner in the said occurrence. Learned counsel submits that co-accused Santu Yadav, Gorelal Yadav and Anil Yadav had 2 already been granted bail vide order dated 3.2.2010, 16.7.2008 and 17.9.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 1611 of 2010, 23887 of 2008 and 17178 of 2008 respectively. Petitioner is stated to be in custody since 16.9.2009. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, BIRDAN YADAV, 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, Aurangabad in connection with (Daudnagar) Goh P.S. Case No. 89 of 2007, 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 3 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.)