IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11796 of 2010 SANJAY YADAV @ SANJAY RAI, SON OF LATE BENGALI RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 19/04/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 307, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution case is that nine unknown persons came and killed the son of the Informant. The reason for the occurrence is said to be an earlier case between accused Ritlal Yadav in which the deceased was a witness and, therefore, he was eliminated. The submission is that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report and he was not an accused in the case in which the deceased was a witness. In view of such, let the petitioner above named, who is in custody since 27.10.2009, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur (Patna) in Bihta P.S.Case No. 280 of 2009 subject to the following conditions: (i)That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will undertake to furnish information to the Court about any change in address of the petitioner. (ii)That the bailor shall also - 2 - state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse. (iii)That the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. (iv)That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled. It has been stated in the impugned order that the petitioner is an accused in Khagaul P.S. Case No. 54/98 and Khagaul P.S. Case No. 130/04 and the petitioner confirms that he is an accused in only these two cases. However, the court below will verify this fact before releasing the petitioner on bail. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J.)