IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11788 of 2010 SHEO BACHAN MAHTO, Son of Late Janak Mahto, Resident of village – Rajdhan Fulwaria, P.S. Kalyanpur, District East Champaran ……….. Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR …… Opposite Party ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Ram Adya Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar – 2, , A.P.P. --------- 2 03.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that first information report was lodged against unknown person. However, petitioner has been made accused on the basis of suspicion. However, he has been put on T.I. parade and the witness has not identified the petitioner. The informant, despite notice has not come for T.I. parade for identification of the petitioner. It is further submitted that co- accused Ranjeet Sah and Ravi Kumar Sah @ Ravindra Prasad @ Ravi Sah have been granted bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.2.2010 2 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5969 of 2010 and 5989 of 2010 respectively as contained in Annexure 3. Petitioner is stated to be in custody since 25.9.2009. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, SHEO BACHAN MAHTO, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the A.D.J. IV, Bettiah (West Champaran) in connection with S.Tr. No. 82 of 2010 arising out of Sugauli (Motihari) G.R.P. Rail P.S. Case No. 26 of 2009, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be a close relative or family member of the petitioner, who shall file affidavit before the concerned court giving complete genealogy to show his or her relationship with the petitioner. If, after his release in this case, the petitioner is again found implicated in similar nature of cases, then the concerned court would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. Further, the petitioner shall remain present 3 on each and every date during the course of trial. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation then the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioner. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)