IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24540 of 2009 MURARI THAKUR @ NIRMAL THAKUR, Son of Awdhesh Thakur, resident of Village- Jagarnath Patahi, P.S. Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur....................................................................Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar....................................................Opposite Party. ----------- 2. 01.09.2009. Heard senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Case is under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the First Information Report, petitioner and three others are specifically named as having opened fire on the deceased. However, learned senior counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to annexures 3 and 4 to show that the informant subsequently filed a petition before the D.I.G., Muzaffarpur, stating that at the behest of Sanjay Thakur wrong names of assailants were mentioned in the First Information Report. It is specifically stated in the petition that four other persons as named in the petition, were actual assailants of the deceased. He also drew attention to annexure- 4, the protest-cum-complaint petition, filed by the informant before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffapur. In the said complaint-cum- protest petition, the informant has given detail story and has disclosed that Sanjay Thakur came at the place of occurrence and had threatened the informant not to name the actual assailants in the First Information Report and First Information Report was drawn at the instance of Sanjay Thakur in which he got the names of the petitioner and others - 2 - with whom he was having land dispute mentioned as the assailants. In the detailed complaint petition, it is also stated that later on when informant came to know that the police did not take step in the light of his petition filed before D.I.G. and submitted charge sheet against the petitioner and others, he is filing this complaint petition. In the complaint petition, it is said that those persons named in the First Information Report were not actual assailants of the deceased and four persons named in the complaint are the actual assailants which was not disclosed earlier at the threatening of the said Sanjay Thakur. It is said that Sanjay Thakur has managed to get innocent persons implicated in the case in connivance with the police. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the said complaint petition is pending for enquiry. It is also stated that the father of the petitioner has filed a criminal writ application in this Court for further investigation in the case by C.I.D., in view of the petition and the complaint filed by the informant. Petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2008. Be that as it may, in view of the specific stand of the informant in the petition before the D.I.G. being (annexue-3) and his complaint-cum-protest petition (annexure-4) in which it is categorically stated that this petitioner alongwith others innocent persons have been made accused in the First Information Report, the petitioner Murari Thakur @ Nirmal Thakur is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the - 3 - Additional Sessions Judge(F.T.C.IV), Muzaffarpur in connection with Sessions Trial No. 375 of 2007 arising out of Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 66 of 2007. U.K. (J.N.Singh,J)