IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20787 of 2011 Ram Govind Kumar, S/O-Rangesh Prasad Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 02 18.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Initially, the first information report was registered against unknown persons but in course of investigation the name of this petitioner surfaced in this case on the basis of mobile set which had fallen on the place of occurrence. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the seized mobile does not belong to the petitioner rather one mobile set of the petitioner was lost prior to the alleged occurrence for which petitioner tried to give a Sanha to the concerned police station but police did not entertain the Sanha of the petitioner. Furthermore, it is contended by him that even if, the prosecution story assumed to be true, then also, at best, a case of Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is made out and petitioner is languishing in jail custody since 06.03.2011. It is also contended by him that when informant got knowledge about the false implication of the petitioner in the alleged crime, she had filed a petition before the court and in the said petition she has specifically stated that petitioner had not committed the alleged crime. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two 2 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 477 of 2009. SHAHZAD ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)