IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2763 of 2010 HEERA LAL MANDAL . Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 3. 26.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The defence on behalf of the petitioner in a Police case under Sections 399, 402 and 414 of the Penal Code and Section 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act is of false implication. The F.I.R. refers to three persons only when it is submitted that Section 399 of the Penal Code visualizes a minimum of five persons under the charging Section 391 of the Penal Code. Learned counsel for the State points out that the petitioner had antecedent of four more cases of which three is he on bail. Keeping in mind his antecedent and the nature of the allegations along with recovery of a loaded country made weapon, let the petitioner above named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 40,000/- (forty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Banka P.S. Case No. 427/09. Both the sureties must be his mother and 2 father respectively whose photographs and proof of residence shall be appended to the bail bonds. The Court below shall through the local police shall have the bail bonds verified and only thereafter shall proceed to enlarge the petitioner on bail. If he absconds during trial quite apart from the petitioner, the Court below shall also be at liberty to proceed appropriately against the sureties also. If the petitioner is involved in any criminal prosecution during the pendency of the present case, it shall be construed as a misuse of privilege of bail liable to cancellation of his bail bonds by the Court below itself. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)