IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.36391 of 2009 BHARTI YADAV @ SHASTRI YADAV @ BHASTRI YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 06/ 26.02.2010 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is charged with an offence punishable under Section 302 the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The F.I.R. was instituted against unknown persons. The name of the petitioner transpired during the course of investigation. It is alleged that the son of the informant had gone to the Sonepur fair along with this petitioner and some others and subsequently his dead body with gun shot injury and other wounds were found on the Railway track. It is in this background that the name of the petitioner was involved in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct allegation against the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner and some others whose names have been mentioned in paragraph-62 of the case diary were alleged to have accompanied the deceased to the Sonepur fair and since the dead body of the son of the informant was subsequently found with injuries on the Railway track that is how his name has been involved in the case. Learned counsel, with reference to an 2 order passed in Criminal Misc. No. 25551 of 2009 (Arun Yadav Vs. The State of Bihar) dated 5.10.2009 submits that the case of the present petitioner is identical to that of Arun Yadav and that he has been in custody since 8.7.2009. A report was called for from the trial court and who has reported that the trial is likely to be concluded within Six months. Having regard to the circumstances set forth, let the petitioner Bharti Yadav @ Shastri Yadav @ Bhastri Yadav be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of F.T.C. III, Patna in connection with Jehanabad Railway P.S. Case No. 38 of 1998 (Sessions Trial No. 909/09) subject to the conditions, namely- (a) one of the bailors would be his brother who would stand as a surety for the petitioner; (b) the petitioner would participate in the trial on each and every date fixed in the case and the failure on the part of the petitioner to attend the trial on two consecutive dates would confer liberty on the court below to initiate proceedings for cancellation of his bail bonds and for taking him into custody. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)