IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6541 of 2011 MOHAN MANJHI @ MUKHIYA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 28.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the state assisted by learned counsel for the informant. Although the petitioner is named in the first information report with allegation that on the alleged date of occurrence, he alongwith other accused went to the house of deceased and took him from his house and subsequently, one, Karu Singh disclosed this fact that the deceased was taken away by petitioner and some other accused and thereafter, the dead body of the deceased was found. In course of investigation, the statement of Karu Singh was recorded but the aforesaid witness has not stated about the involvement of the petitioner. It would further appear from perusal of the impugned order that in course of investigation, some witnesses stated that the petitioner had sustained injury in the alleged occurrence. The police after investigation submitted final form in respect of the petitioner but learned Chief Judicial Magistrate differed with the findings and took cognizance against the petitioner. Furthermore, it would appear from perusal of the record that some witnesses claimed to have identified the petitioner in 2 the alleged occurrence. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties, let the petitioner, namely Mohan Manjhi @ Mukhiya be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Sikandra P.S. Case No. 217 of 2010 to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui. AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)