IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8130 of 2010 SUNIL BHUIYA Versus STATE OF BIHAR with Cr.Misc. No.12572 of 2010 DILLU YADAV & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 9 02.02.2011 Both these applications arise out of the same case which is registered under Sections 302,307 and other sections of the Indian Penal code read with various sections of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1908 giving rise to Madanpur P.S.Case No. 166 of 2008. A perusal of the F.I.R shows that the police upon receiving information that Maoists extremists were planning to attack the police station , went to the village in question searching for the Maoists. As soon as they reached in the village there was large scale of firing, which used for over three hours in which a police constable was also killed after firing subsided four persons were arrested from the village and from amongst them large quantity of empty cartridges were recovered. Out of the four persons, two were the petitioners Dillu Yadav and Shambhu Yadav who are accused in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No 12572 of 2010. Upon search the police found a diary. In the diary there was a list of over hundered persons who were trained a year back as Maoists. The name of the petitioner Sunil Bhuiya finds place in the said diary it is by virtue of the provisions of Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8130 of 2010 Act that he is made an accused in this case . He is not alleged to be present when the incident occurred nor was arrested at the site . He was arrested over a month a later near a tea shop... , Heard learned senior counsel in support of application on behalf of the Dillu Yadav and Shambhu Yadav . He fairly submits that their bail application was earlier rejected by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11308 of 2009 by order dated 19.8.09. Learned APP points out that two other persons who had been arrested along with Dillu Yadav and Shambhu Yadav moved this Court for bail . Their bail application was rejected and their appeal to the Supreme Court was also rejected which orders are on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sunil Bhuiya submits that his case is entirely on different footing apart from the name figuring in the diary with regard to having received training. Having considered the matter in view of the materials on record, let Sunil Bhuiya be released on bail of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate ,Aurangabad ( Bihar), subject to the condition that one of the bailers would be the elder brother of the petitioner and petitioner would appear in Court on each and every date. When he is required to appear, he would physically appear. So far as, petitioners Dillu Yadav and Shambhu Yadav are concerned, their applications are dismissed with an observations that their trial be expedited. Namita ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)