IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19850 of 2010 1. CHANDAN CHAUDHARY 2. Pawan Kumar Versus STATE OF BIHAR with Cr.Misc. No.19943 of 2010 1. LALO RAM 2. Manoj Ram 3. Sanjay Ram Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 17.6.2010. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State in both the cases. The petitioners are in custody in connection with Sheikhpura P.S. Case No.66 of 2010 for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 436, 325, 427, 332 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners jointly submits that save and except that the petitioners have been identified amongst the mob of 100-150 persons, no specific allegation against either of them has been set out nor any specific overt act has been attributed to them. Learned counsel submits that there is a general allegation against all the members of the mob of pelting stones at the police raiding parties and setting fire in the course of action taken by the police. 2 He then submits that in similar circumstances, this court has granted bail to some of the accused persons in Cr.Miss.No.11569 of 2010 and Cr.Misc.No.12482 of 2010 vide order passed on 30.4.2010. Having regard to the submissions aforesaid, let the petitioners (1) Chandan Chaudhary, (2) Pawan Kumar, (3) Lalo Ram, (4) Manoj Ram and (5) Sanjay Ram be released on bail on furnishing individual bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura in connection with Sheikhpura P.S.Case No.66 of 2010, subject to the following conditions (a) that one of the bailors would be a close relation or a family member of the petitioners, who would indicate the relationship with him, (b) that the said bailors would be under a duty to inform the court below that the petitioners have been named and found involve in any other case of similar nature and whereupon the court below would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds and for taking them into custody and (c) that the petitioners would remain present on each and every 3 date fixed in the case and failure on the part of the petitioners to attend the court below on two consecutive dates fixed without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the court concerned, would confer liberty to the court concerned to initiate proceedings for cancellation of their bail bonds and for taking them into custody. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)