IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3739 of 2010 BABA @ BABLU PANDEY Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03 18.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The defence of the petitioner in a Police case under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code is that it is against six unknown, and grant of bail to co-accused with common materials in Cr. Misc. No. 2099 of 2010. Learned counsel for the State points out that the petitioner has antecedent of four more cases unlike the person granted bail. Let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 40,000/- (Forty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 426 of 2009. Both the sureties must be his mother and wife respectively, whose photographs and proof of residence shall be appended to the bail bonds. The petitioner shall be required to be properly represented on each date in the trial including his personal appearance on the dates that the court below shall so direct. If he 2 defaults on either count affecting the progress of the trial, the court below shall be at liberty to deal with him appropriately notwithstanding the present order. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)