IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.819 of 2010 UPENDRA MAHTO SON OF RAMBRIKSH MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 19.1.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been named in the first information report even though he is co-villager and the explanation for the long delay in his appearance is that he was under the impression that the informant has filed a compromise petition and, therefore, he need not have appeared in the case, let the petitioner above named, who is in custody since 28.11.2008, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri A.K. Sinha, Additional Sessions Judge-I, Barh in S.Tr.No.959 of 2009 arising out of Bakhtiarpur P.S.case No.153 of 1997, subject to the conditions (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner, (ii) that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse of bail and (iii) that the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do - 2 - so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )