IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18124 of 2010 ASHOK YADAV @ KARI YADAV, SON OF LATE RAMAWTAR YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHHOTAKI RAJWA, POLICE STATION-HASANPUR, DISTRICT-SAMASTIPUR……………………PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR………………OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma No.1, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, A.P.P. ----------- 4. 4.8.2010. 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 456, 376, 341, 323 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 3(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The petitioner’s prayer for bail was earlier rejected vide order dated 24.11.2009 passed in Criminal Misc. No.34258 of 2009. However, a liberty was granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after completion of one year in custody. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner - 2 - that the petitioner has surrendered on 9.4.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in fact, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on account of the fact that the informant had purchased some grocery articles amounting to Rs.30,000/- for performing ‘Shradh’ of her husband from the shop of the petitioner and when the money was demanded back, this false case has been lodged. It is submitted that it would be manifest from the First Information Report itself that the informant had developed friendship with the petitioner and had stated that allegedly the petitioner had taken Rs.25000/- from her, which was not being returned. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the aforesaid facts reveal that a false case has been instituted on that score. Further contention is that the Medical Board also has not come to a definite conclusion that the rape had been committed upon the victim as no external or internal injury has been found by the Medical Board on her private part. I have perused the report of the concerned court, kept at flag ‘A’, which shows that the trial of the case is yet to commence and the petitioner has remained in custody for - 3 - more than one year. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, Ashok Yadav @ Kari 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rosera at Samastipur, in connection with Hassanpur P.S. Case No.164/08, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be the close relative or his family member, who will file affidavit before the court below giving full genealogy showing his or her relationship with the petitioner. Further, the petitioner shall remain present all along during the course of the trial in the court below. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates during the course of the trial without any reasonable cause shown to the satisfaction of the court concerned, the trial court would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)