IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7600 of 2008 CHANDRA BHUSHAN PRASAD & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 5.5.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. The two petitioners pray for anticipatory bail in a case instituted under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that these two petitioners are the Phuphera cousin of the informant and despite the said relationship the informant has not named them in the F.I.R. It is further pointed out that only two witnesses much later on 11.3.07 have deposed against these petitioners that they had recognized the petitioners as among the persons who had fired whereas the occurrence itself has taken place on 21.11.06 and for a period of three and half months there was not a whisper against the petitioners. Learned counsel also submits that litigations with respect to family property are going on in between the father of the informant and the mother of these petitioners and for the said reason at a subsequent stage as an afterthought these petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel also emphasises the fact that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent and have never been involved in any crime. - 2 - On a consideration of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that the petitioners (1) Chandra Bhushan Prasad and (2) Shashi Bhushan Prasad, in the event of their arrest/surrender in the Court below within four weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 142 of 2006 to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi subject to the other conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. P. Kumar (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)