IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27342 of 2010 UPENDRA RAUT Versus STATE OF BIHAR ---------- 05/ 01.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned P.P. for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant. Petitioner is named in the FIR with direct allegation of opening fire upon deceased but after due investigation the police submitted final form in respect of petitioner showing accusation false against him. Furthermore, it is obvious from perusal of the case diary that there are two sets of statements of prosecution witnesses. Informant and some other witnesses have supported the participation of the petitioner in the alleged crime but another set of witnesses have stated that one Pintu Raut and two others committed murder of the deceased. The stand of petitioner is that nephew and son of witness Bishundeo as well as two others badly assaulted petitioner at Delhi for which a case was lodged in Delhi and at the instance of Bishundeo who happens to be witness of this case, petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, I think it proper to grant privilege of bail to petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner (Upendra Raut) is directed to be released on bail in connection with Belchhi P.S. Case no. 39 of 2009 registered under section 302/34 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000-/ with two sureties of the like - 2 - amount each to the satisfaction of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barh (Patna). shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)