IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38387 of 2009 1. PANKAJ YADAV @ PANKAJ KUMAR YADAV 2.Purshottam Kumar Yadav @ Pursottam Kumar both sons of Arjun Yadav, Resident of village Akbana, P.S. Sheikhpura, Dist. Sheikhpura. ………… .Peptitiners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 2 11.11.2009 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Petitioners are accused in Sheikhpura P.S. case No. 270 of 1998 for the offence punishable under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (Sessions Case No. 454/01). The substance of allegation as set out in the first information report is that one Arjun Yadav assaulted the son of the informant by farsa on the skull leading to bleeding whereupon he fell down. It is alleged that thereafter these petitioners have assaulted the son of the informant which led to his death. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the police had submitted final form against these petitioners but subsequently on the basis of the statement made during the course of trial summons were issued under section 319 Cr.P.C. and wherereafter these petitioners have been taken into custody. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that said Arjun Yadav who had been charged with assault on the deceased with farsa on skull had been earlier granted bail by this court but details are not available. He further with reference to postmortem report submits that the injury on the other part of the body is not grievous in nature. He further submits that petitioners would regularly attend the court on the date fixed in the trial. - 2 - Considering the circumstances forth with let the above named petitioners be released on bail upon each one of them furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Session Judge, F.T.C. No. V, Sheikhpura , in connection with Sessions Case No. 454 of 2001 arising from Sheikhpura P.S. case No. 270/98, subject to the condition that the petitioners would attend the trial of the case on each and every date and the failure on the part of the petitioners to attend the trial without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the trial court would grant liberty to the trial court to initiate a proceeding for cancellation of bail bond and for taking them into custody. (Jyoti Saran, J) M.Rahman