IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.9141 of 2010 RAJU BAHARDAR @ RAJ KUMAR BAHARDAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5/ 26.07.2010 The case has come under the heading “To Be Mentioned” at the instance of the petitioner. By order dated 21.6.2010, the petitioner was allowed bail but on the condition that his wife would stand surety for him, but it has been submitted that the petitioner’s wife has no property in her name and, so, she was not accepted as bailor by the court below. Learned court below is directed to accept the petitioner’s wife as bailor on personal surety after due verification of her identity on the basis of documentary proof. Condition no. (ii) be also deleted since it has been mentioned in the order itself that the petitioner has criminal antecedent. The order dated 21.6.2010 stands modified to the aforesaid extent. Let this order be communicated to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, in connection with Sadar Purnea P.S. Case No. 298 of 2009, through FAX at the cost of the petitioner. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)