IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4937 of 2011 SUKHAL RAI @ SUKHLAL RAI SON OF NOKHE LAL RAI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 9.3.2011. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Sessions Trial No.224 of 2010 arising from Kamtaul P.S.Case No.128 of 2009 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 337, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added to the set of allegations. The prayer of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court by order dated 30.6.2010 passed in Cr.Misc.No.21662 of 2010. Allegation against the petitioner as set out in the first information report is of causing neck injury to the informant in course of altercation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the occurrence is said to have taken place on 29.8.2009 but 2 the first information report was instituted after an unexplained delay of seven days on 5.9.2009. He, with reference to the deposition of the Medical Officer, who conducted the post mortem on the persons of the deceased placed at Annexure-3 to the application, submits that the cause of injury has been attributed to the injury caused by hard and blunt substance/object on the spinal chord. Learned counsel, with reference to the allegation set out in the first information report, submits that no such allegation of hitting the informant with hard and blunt object has been set out in the first information report and which makes the charge against the petitioner doubtful. He thus prays for reconsideration of the prayer of the petitioner. Regard being had to the circumstances and the submission of the learned counsel, let the petitioner Sukhal Rai alias Sukhlal Rai 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 the 3rd 3 Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in connection with Sessions Trial No.224 of 2010 arising from Kamtaul P.S.Case No.128 of 2009, subject to the conditions that the petitioner would ensure his representation before the trial court on each and every date fixed in the trial and failure on the part of the petitioner to ensure his representation on two consecutive dates in the trial without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the trial court, would entitle the trial court to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner and to take him into custody. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J)