IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.172 of 2011 SURAJ KUMAR @ BHANDUL Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 02.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the state. Petitioner seeks his bail in connection with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 75 of 2010 registered under section- 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. but during course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested and it is stated that one looted mobile was recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. The contention of Learned counsel for the petitioner is that nothing has been recovered from possession of the petitioner. He further submitted that neither the so-called seized mobile nor the petitioner was put on T.I.P. He also drew my attention towards the photo copy of certified copy of seizure list and submits that the aforesaid seizure list was prepared on 10.08.2010 but the said seizure list was signed by the witnesses on 11.08.2010. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions of the parties, the petitioner, namely, Suraj Kumar @ Bhandul is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 2 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 75 of 2010 to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur. AKV/- ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)