IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16275 of 2010 1. DR.KULDIP KUMAR BAITHA son of Sri Sugamar Baitha 2. Sugambar Baitha, son of Late Patyu Baitha Both residents of village-Narayanpur, Police Station-Thawe, District-Gopalganj Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 04.08.2010 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant. The petitioners are in custody in connection with Thawe P.S. Case No. 12 of 2010 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioners herein have been charged with the death of brother of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that merely on the basis of circumstances accompanying the occurrence as the also the confessional statement of the co- accused, that the petitioners herein have been involved in the present case. He further submits that the different paragraphs of the case diary which has been considered by the Court below contains the statement of the family members of the informant. He further 2 submits that merely on the basis of confessional statement the petitioners have been kept in custody. He thus submits that in absence of their being any direct or indirect evidence connecting the petitioners herein with the alleged occurrence, their incarceration is unjustified. Learned counsel for the informant opposing the bail application of the petitioner submits that the deceased was last seen in the company of the petitioner No.2, Sugambar Baitha and that sufficient material has come in the course of investigation connecting the petitioner No.1, Dr. Kuldip Kumar Baitha of having involved professionals for eliminating the deceased against whom there were charges of having relationship with the sister of the petitioner No.1. He thus submits that the person who received the money and who executed the killing have accepted their guilt and have also admitted to have received the amount from petitioner No.1. He thus submits that the petitioners are not entitled for consideration of their bail. Having regard to the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and 3 considering the facts and circumstances available on the records of the proceeding, I find that in so far as the petitioner No.2, Sugambar Baitha is concerned except that the deceased has been stated to have accompanied petitioner No.2, Sugambar Baitha no other allegation is set out against him. In the circumstances, let the petitioner No.2, Sugambar Baitha be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in connection with Thawe P.S. Case No. 12 of 2010. Considering the materials that have been placed on the records of the proceedings and gathered during the course of investigation of the case, I am not inclined to consider the prayer for bail made on behalf of the petitioner No.1, Dr. Kuldip Kumar Baitha and the same is rejected. The application stands disposed of with the direction aforesaid. Bibhash ( Jyoti Saran, J.)