IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.31443 of 2011 1. Krishnadeo Mandal, son of Mushaharu Mandal 2. Satan Mandal 3. Madan Mandal 4. Kameshwar Mandal All sons of Chhataharu Mandal 5. Bushnudeo Mandal, son of Mushaharu Mandal 6. Hari Mandal, son of Birendra Mandal 7. Raj Kumar @ Raj Mr. Mandal, son of Madan Mandal 8. Arun Kumar @ Arun Mandal, son of Satan Mandal 9. Mantu Mumar @ Mantu Mandal, son of Krishnadeo Mandal 10. Prashant Kumar @ Prashant Mandal 11. Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Mandal Both sons of Krishnadeo Mandal 12. Kishore Mandal, son of Madan Mandal 13. Ram Bahadur Mandal @ Bahadur Mandal, son of Deodutt Mandal Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 3. 21.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case is that the two persons were done to death by unknown miscreants. During investigation, it transpired that the dead body of the two deceased namely, Domi Mandal and Ramanuj Pandit @ Rama Mandal were recovered in two different places. It also transpired that the petitioners had land dispute with these two deceased and recently the deceased had won one civil case with regard to the B.T. Act. During investigation it also transpired that petitioners No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were seen taking the two deceased out of the Hat whereafter the dead 2 body were recovered. Considering that the petitioners No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were last seen with the deceased and there was motive in the occurrence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them. The prayer for bail against petitioners No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 is rejected. With regard to petitioners No. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 since there is no allegation that they were seen with the two deceased as pointed out by the A.P.P., in the event of surrender, named above, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, in connection with Jankinagar P.S. Case No. 43 of 2010, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P.C. and (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioners. The bailors will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioners. (ii) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioners are not accused in any other case and, if they are, they shall not be released on bail. (iii) That the bailors shall also state on affidavit that they will inform the court concerned if the petitioners are implicated in any other case of similar nature 3 after their 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. (iv) That the petitioners will give an undertaking that they will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if they fail to do so on two given dates and delay the trial in any manner, their bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. (v) That the petitioners will be well represented on each date and if they fail to do so on two consecutive dates, their bail will be liable to be cancelled. S.Ali ( Anjana Prakash, J.)