IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14612 of 2009 DILIP MAHTO @ DILIP PASI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 24.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner seeks bail from custody in a Police case under Sections 386 of the Penal Code. The submission is of false implication and only alleged demand for ransom. Learned counsel for the State points out from the re- statement of the informant that the ransom was paid and that the petitioner has antecedent of five more cases. Considering the allegations and the period of custody since 2.8.2008, let the petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M., Rosera, Samastipur in Rosera P.S. Case No. 45 of 2008. Both the bailors shall be his mother and another blood relative respectively, whose photograph and proof of residence shall be appended to the bail bonds. The petitioner is directed to be properly represented on each date in the trail and shall be bound to physically appear on such dates that the court below shall direct for his appearance so that the trial may proceed expeditiously. In the event of his failure of two directions for his representation/appearance, the court below shall be at liberty to deal with appropriately notwithstanding the present order. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)