IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.37064 of 2009 SURENDRA @ VIDYARTHI YADAV, Son of Nunu Lal Yadav, resident of Village- Padampur, P.S. Bihra, District- Saharsa. ........Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR....................................Opposite Party. ----------- 03. 09.12.2009. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Saharsa (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 444 of 2008 for offences punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. Substance of allegation as set out in the First Information Report is that a dacoity was committed in the house of the informant and in course of the dacoity, one Shiv Nandan Sah was injured who later succumbed to the injuries. The informant has claimed to have identified the dacoit. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and that though the informant has claimed to have identified the dacoit but the police has not put him on T.I. Parade and which itself proves that he has been wrongfully arrested. Learned counsel further submits that save and except confessional statement before the police there is no other material which has been gathered during the course of investigation. Learned counsel further submits that three other persons who have been arrested in the present transactions have been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No.5007 of 2009 2 vide order passed on 18.04.2009; Cr. Misc. No. 9019 of 2009 vide order passed on 18.04.2009 and Cr. Misc. No. 21847 of 2009 vide order passed on 07.09.2009. Learned counsel thus submits that this case is on same and similar footing. Having regard to the facts and circumstances set forth, let petitioner, namely, Surendra @ Vidyarthi Yadav be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Saharsa (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 444 of 2008 arising out of G.R. No. 1636 of 2008 subject to the following conditions:- (A) One of the bailors would be the father of the petitioner. (B) The petitioner would be attending the court below on each and every date fixed and the failure on his part to attend the court below on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the court below would confer liberty on the court below to initiate proceedings for cancellation of his bail bonds and for taking him into custody. U.K. (Jyoti Saran,J)