IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22218 of 2008 SURENDRA RAUT & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 16.7.2008. Heard counsel for the petitioners and the State. Offence alleged is under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioners is that they had taken son of the informant namely Saroj Mahto with them. For three months he worked in centreing work on the assurance that he will be given three thousand per month. Further allegation is that the accused persons came back but the son of the informant did not return and the money which was sent by his son was also not given. It has been mentioned in the F.I.R. that he might have been killed. Subsequently there is no informant about the where about of the son of the informant. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the statement of the mother show that the money which was sent by his son was given to her and when the petitioners return back, he was still working there and was alive. It has also been submitted that no offence under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. Considering this fact prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. The petitioners namely 1. Surendra Raut and 2. Guddu Raut are directed to surrender before the C.J.M.Sitamarhi within four weeks from today and on their so surrendering they shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M.Sitamarhi in connection with Complaint case no.1450 of 2007 - 2 - subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Sss/- (Mridula Mishra, J)