IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40485 of 2010 MD.FAIYAZ @ MUNNA @ FAIYAZ ALAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5. 15.3.2011 Heard. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. of a case under Section 392 of the I.P.C. which relates to the snatching of rupees two lacs at gun point from the informant by some criminals. Subsequent to the lodging of the F.I.R. some witnesses claiming themselves to be the eye witnesses started naming the petitioner on account of having identified the petitioner as amongst one of the culprits who was identified by them. The contention is that if the petitioner had been identified at the time of occurrence, his name ought to have appeared in the F.I.R. The next contention is that the name of the petitioner has come in the confessional statement of one Ramesh Sharma and above all there is no recovery of the theft property. Regard being had to the above facts and circumstances, let the petitioner Md. Faiyez alias Munna alias Faiyaz Alam be directed to be released on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/-( ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kishanganj, in Sessions Trial No. 994 of 2009 arising out of Kochadhaman P.S.Case No. 130 of 2008. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)