IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9775 of 2010 RAHUL SINGH, SON OF CHANDRIKA SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BAGWATIA, POLICE STATION-KESHARIA, DISTRICT-WEST CHAMPARAN. ………………………………………………..PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR……………….OPPOSITE PARTY. --------- with Cr.Misc. No.9794 of 2010 ASHOK KUMAR SONI @ BHAWANI, SON OF PASHAPAT PRASAD ALIAS PASHAPAT TIWARI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-ADARSH NAGAR, I.T.I. COLONY, POLICE STATION-BETTIAH MUFASIL, DISTRICT-WEST CHAMPARAN………………………………PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR……………..OPPOSITE PARTY. ------- For the Petitioners : M/s. S.N.P. Sinha, Senior Advocate, Shiv Kumar Dwivedy and Rakesh Kumar Samrendra, Advocates (in both cases). For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh No.5, A.P.P. (in both cases). -------- 3. 31.3.2010. Both cases have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order as both of them arise out of the same Bettiah Town Police Station Case No.166 of - 2 - 2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered under Sections 302, 387 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 27 of the Arms Act. As per the allegation set up in the First Information Report, two persons had been killed. Two accused persons had been named in the First Information Report, namely, Alind Rai and Pramod Kumar Pandey. The allegation was that certain persons including aforesaid persons accosted the brothers of the informant and fired at them causing their death. The aforesaid two accused persons were identified by the informant. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are not named in the First Information Report and their names have surfaced on account of the fact that the co- accused, Alind Rai, had allegedly made self incriminating statement before the police and there he had named the petitioners as being conspirators to the aforesaid occurrence. However, it is submitted that the petitioner, Rahul Singh(in - 3 - Criminal Misc. No.9775 of 2010), was already in custody with respect to Motihari P.S. Case No.315 of 2008 at the time of occurrence. It has also been submitted that the named co-accused person, namely, Alind Rai alias Alindra Rai, alongwith Chunu Thakur and Raj Kumar Rai alias Ram Bilash Rai, had already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court vide order as contained in Annexure-‘2’ to the application. Another named co-accused, Pramod Kumar Pandey, had also been granted bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.10.2009 passed in Criminal Misc. No.29684 of 2009. The petitioner, Rahul Singh (in Criminal Misc. No.9775 of 2010) is stated to be in custody with respect to the present case since 25.11.2009 and the petitioner, Ashok Kumar Soni @ Bhawani (in Criminal Misc. No.9794 of 2010) is in custody since 7.12.2009. It has been submitted on behalf of the State that during the course of investigation, it has come that the petitioners were conspirators in the commission of the alleged crime, however, it is admitted that the named accused and many other co-accused persons had already been granted bail by different orders passed by different - 4 - Benches of this Court. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioners, namely, Rahul Singh (in Criminal Misc. No.9775 of 2010) and Ashok Kumar Soni @ Bhawani (in Criminal Misc. No.9794 of 2010) are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.- IVth, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Sessions Trial No.15 of 2010 (arising out of Bettiah Town P.S. Case No.166 of 2009), with a further condition that one of the bailors in case of each of the petitioners must be the close relative of their family member, who will file affidavit before the court bellow giving full genealogy showing his or her relationship with the petitioners. Further, the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date during the course of the trial in the court below. If the petitioners fail to remain present on two consecutives dates during the course of the trial in the court below without any reasonable cause being shown, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation - 5 - of their bail bonds. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)