IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3605 of 2010 MD.MUSTAFA, son of Late Amil @ Wakil, R/o village Ganaur, P.S. Bisfi, District – Madhubani ………. Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR ……. Opposite Party ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. A.K.Thakur, Advocate For the State : Mr. Uma Shankar Pd. Singh, A.P.P. ------ 3 23.03.2010 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 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that few persons had been named in the first information report but the petitioner does not name figure there. However, subsequently in the further statement, the first informant had named the petitioner as allegedly her husband (the deceased), had gone with the petitioner at about 4 P.M. on same day and when she inquired regarding him from this the petitioner, he became nervous. Thereafter, a shopkeeper had also stated that petitioner had come to his grocery shop to purchase tobacco and he was looking very nervous and there was a blood stain on his clothes. It has also come that petitioner was 2 allegedly seen in the company of the deceased in the evening of the alleged date of occurrence and both of them were in intoxicated condition. There is self incriminating confessional statement of the petitioner also accepting the guilt. However, it is submitted that it has got no evidentiary value. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the statement of daughter of the deceased had also been recorded and she had stated that at about 9.00 – 10.00 P.M. in the night when her father did not return, her mother had gone for his search and the petitioner also accompanied and assisted her. However, she had not stated anything further. It is submitted that the aforesaid fact falsifies the statement of the grocery shop owner who had allegedly stated that at around 10 P.M. the petitioner came to his shop and he was in nervous condition. However, it is submitted that at best it is case of circumstantial evidence as none had seen the occurrence. Learned counsel for the State submitted that petitioner’s name has surfaced subsequently on the basis of further statement of the victim and the 3 grocery shop owner as well as on the confessional statement of the petitioner himself. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, MD.MUSTAFA, 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, Madhubani in connection with Bisfi P.S. Case No. 35 of 2009. 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.)