IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40762 of 2009 UPENDRA SAHNI, son of Sri Fakiran Sahni, resident of village- Chakki Sohagpur, P. S.- Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur…. Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 27.11.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner who is facing prosecution for offence under Section 302 and other allied offence of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act seeks bail primarily on the ground that whatever allegations were alleged against the petitioner in the first information report do not stand corroborated from the post-mortem report inasmuch as there is no firearm injury on the person of the deceased whereas five persons including the petitioner and one Fakiran Sahni were said to have made indiscriminate firing on the person of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accused Fakiran Sahni has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 20.8.2009 in 2 Cr. Misc. No. 29885 of 2009. Learned counsel for the informant would however submit that there was a common intention of the entire unlawful assembly to do away with the life of the deceased and when the petitioner was armed with a gun which was also used for terrorizing the deceased and his men no premium can be given to him or the defence if there was no firearm injury found on the person of the deceased, specially when deceased due to such terrorization was nabbed at the spot and was given fatal blow by other co-accused persons in company of the petitioner. Considering the aforementioned submissions and primarily the fact that this court on identical allegation has released co-accused Fakiran Sahni on bail, this court would also direct for release of the petitioner namely Upendra Sahni on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the 3 satisfaction of Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate (West), Muzaffarpur in connection with Paroo P. S. Case No. 47 of 2009, subject to a condition that one of the bailors must be a close family member of the petitioner. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall remain present in course of trial and in his absence for two consecutive dates during such trial will make him liable for cancellation of his bail. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)