IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26773 of 2009 BALLI RAI . Versus STATE OF BIHAR . with Cr.Misc. No.27235 of 2009 VIJAY KUMAR KESHARI @ VIJAY MUNSHI . Versus STATE OF BIHAR . with Cr.Misc. No.26542 of 2009 ARJUN RAI. Versus STATE OF BIHAR. ----------- 04/ 06.11.2009 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. The petitioners herein are accused in Khajekalan P.S. Case No. 75 of 2009 for offences punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The name of the petitioners herein has transpired during the course of investigation into the death of the brother of the informant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners jointly submit that except for the omnibus nature of allegation against these petitioners that they were present at the place of occurrence where the death of the brother of the informant took place, no other material has come during the course of investigation 2 attributing any specific charge upon any of the petitioners. It is further submitted that the postmortem report shows gun shot injury. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant submits that the postmortem report also shows multiple injuries on the deceased and which is attributable to these petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar situation one Mantun Yadav @ Mantu Rai has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. No. 21561of 2009 vide order passed on 8.7.2009. Considering the facts and circumstances, let petitioners, Balli Rai, Vijay Kumar Keshari @ Vijay Munshi and Arjun Rai be released on bail upon each one of them individually furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City in connection with Khajekalan P.S. Case No. 75 of 2009 subject to the conditions that:- (1) One of the bailors would be their blood relative who would indicate his relationship with the petitioners. (2) The petitioners would be attending the court below on each and every date fixed in the case. If the petitioners fail to attend the court below on two 3 consecutive dates, then the court below would be at liberty to initiate proceedings for cancellation of their bail bonds and for taking them into custody. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)