IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42043 of 2010 WAKIL SAHNI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 22.12.2010 Heard both sides. The petitioner has filed the present application seeking bail in a case instituted under sections 395 and 397 IPC. Having regard to the allegations and materials available on records, his prayer for bail was rejected by this Court on 02.07.2009 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 21108 of 2009 (Annexure-1). He was, however, granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail after ten months if in the meanwhile the trial is not taken up. It appears that the petitioner again renewed his prayer for bail in Cr.Misc. No.22327 of 2010 wherein a statement was made that the case has not been even committed to the court of sessions. Having regard to the aforesaid stand of the petitioner, he was granted bail subject to verification of aforesaid statement made in paragraph 8 of the bail application as would appear from the order dated 14.07.2010 (Annexure-1/1). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of aforesaid order, he could not be released on bail as on verification it was found that the case had already been committed to the court of sessions. Learned counsel has tried to explain the circumstances by referring to the averment made in paragraph 5 of the bail application. It is now stated that although the commitment has been made but charges have not been 2 framed till date. Having regard to the submissions advanced at the Bar and after going through the materials on record, this Court while declining the prayer of the petitioner, disposes of this application by the following order: Let the trial court take steps and frame charges against the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/communication of this order in the court below. As soon as the charges are framed, the trial court (F.T.C. IV, Muzaffarpur) shall release the petitioner abovenamed on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to its satisfaction in connection with Sessions Trial No. 793/09 arising out of Aurai P.S. Case No.17/08, subject to the condition that one of the bailors shall be his own/close family member. The petitioner shall appear on each date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the trial court shall cancel his bail bonds and secure his arrest in accordance with law. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )