IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14690 of 2010 MANOJ GUPTA, Son of Singhasan Gupta, Resident of village and P.S. Sheosagar, District Rohtas …… Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR …. Opposite Party ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate For the State : Shaheen Begum, A.P.P. 2 29.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has been implicated in this case only for the reason that he happens to be the son of the main accused Singhasan Prasad Gupta. It is submitted that it would be manifest from the first information report that in fact the alleged transaction was between the informant and the father of the petitioner, namely, Singhasan Prasad Gupta, however, later on petitioner has also been named along with his father though nothing was on record to suggest his complicity. It is submitted that the petitioner was also named in 2 another case on the same date on which the present case has been registered the other case being Sheosagar P.S. Case No. 236/2009. It is contended that other than aforesaid cases the petitioner does not stand implicated in any other case. Petitioner is stated to be in custody since 5.1.2010. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, MANOJ GUPTA, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas in connection with Sheosagar P.S. Case No. 235 of 2009, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be a close relative or family member of the petitioner, who shall file affidavit before the concerned court giving complete genealogy to show his or her relationship with the petitioner. If, after his release in this case, the petitioner is again found implicated in similar nature of cases, then the concerned court would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. 3 Further, the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during the course of trial. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation then the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioner. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)