IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1090 of 2010 1.CHANDAN KUMAR son of Ramnuj Singh, resident of Village Badauni, P.S. Parwalpur, Dist. Nalanda ……..Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR…………………….. O.P. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P. ------------ 2 10.5.2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for offences u/s 364, 302/34 of the Indian penal Code, the petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that even during the course of investigation nobody claimed to be eye witness of the actual occurrence and entire prosecution version is based on suspicion and surmises. Some of the witnesses have named one Chandan Kumar son of Chandrashekhar Singh, who is alleged to be instrumental in getting the crime in question committed. The petitioner is not that Chandan Kumar, who happens to be son of Ramanuj Singh. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State after going through the case diary could not point out any specific role played by the petitioner for committing the crime in question. However, he points out that there are some materials showing some involvement of the petitioner also for the commission of crime in question. Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each - 2 - to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M, Hilsa, Nalanda in connection with Parwalpur P.S. Case No. 26 of 2009, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. ) M.Rahman