IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20905 of 2009 RAJ KISHORE KUMAR @ BANTI KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 30.06.2009 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under sections 395, 397 and 412 of Indian Penal Code. The F.I.R was lodged against unknown. As per F.I.R., 3-4 unknown miscreants forcibly got opened the door and committed dacoity in the house in course whereof certain house hold articles including one mobile phone was taken away by the miscreants. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the only material against him is that on a search being conducted of his house, one mobile phone was recovered. It is contended that the seizure memo would show that the mobile phone allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner is different from what has been described in the F.I.R. It has fairly been contended that apart from that, there is only an alleged confessional statement made by him confessing his guilt which did not bring about any recovery of the stolen articles. It is contended that the petitioner bears a good clean antecedent and that he is in custody since 14.1.2009. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid submission of the counsel of the petitioner that the mobile phone allegedly recovered from his possession is/was different from what has 2 been detailed in the F.I.R. In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner abovenamed 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 learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa (Nalanda) in connection with Islampur P.S. case no. 234 of 2008 subject to the condition that one of the bailers will be own/close family member of the petitioner pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )