IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38561 of 2009 MUSHARU YADAV, son of Shri Inder Yadav, resident of village Gosaindagpur, P.S. Nathnagar, District Bhagalpur Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 12.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The petitioner faces prosecution for offence u/ss 302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that not only the petitioner’s implication in this case is on mere guesswork of the informant but there was nothing direct which can connect him to the murder of the deceased. In this context he would submit that even if the motive for committing murder as suggested by the informant against the petitioner is accepted to be correct there has to be some more link to show that the petitioner actually had done so. In the opinion of this Court counsel for the petitioner seems to be correct, inasmuch as nothing has been specifically alleged against him in the F.I.R. except that he may have an intention 2 to kill the deceased and even the witnesses in course of investigation, as recorded in the impugned order, have gone to the extent that some 2-3 days prior to the occurrence there was some scuffle between the petitioner and the deceased in which the petitioner had threatened the deceased to kill him. That by itself cannot be sufficient to implicate the petitioner, inasmuch as there is no further material to show that after giving such threatening either the petitioner was last seen with the deceased or that he had anything in furtherance to the aforementioned threatening. That being so, this Court would direct for release of the abovenamed petitioner on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in Nathnagar P.S.Case No. 140/2008 (G.R.No. 2005/2008), one of which must be furnished by close family relative of the petitioner preferably by the parents/ wife/ own brother of the 3 petitioner. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall remain present in course of trial and his absence on two consecutive dates will make him liable for cancellation of his bail. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/