IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.19901 of 2010 PANKAJ SINGH @ PANKAJ KUMAR, son of Sri Mahendra Singh Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 14.06.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case instituted for the offence under sections 448, 323, 324, 307, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation against the petitioners is that after the co- accused Laddu Singh and Nato Singh fired and injured the husband and brother-in-law of the informant, he came and snatched away the watch and golden chain of the husband of the informant. Submission is that there is no allegation of assault against the petitioner and there appears to be land litigation between the parties. In view of such, in the event of surrender of the petitioner, named above, within four weeks from today in connection with Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 116 of 2009, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/-(five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barh, subject to 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 petitioner, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailors will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioner, (ii)That the petitioner shall - 2 - undertake to be represented on the first date after cognizance and in case he fails to do so, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled and (iii) That the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)