IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33731 of 2009 KAILA SINGH, SON OF SUNDAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RANA BIGHA, POLICE STATION BARH, DISTRICT-PATNA. ………………………………………………………………PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. P.C. Yadav, Advocate. For the State : Mr. R.P.S. Singh, A.P.P. --------- 2. 9.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is an accused in a case under Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is not named in the First Information Report. The victim boy was recovered by the police after five days of the alleged kidnapping, however, in his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim boy had not named the petitioner. It is also submitted that the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of the confessional statements of the co-accused, Sunil and other co-accused persons. It is further submitted that the statement of one Shashi Bhushan Tiwary, from whose house the victim boy was recovered, was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The aforesaid Shashi Bhushan Tiwary is the resident of the same village to which the petitioner belongs, however, he has not named the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner has got clean antecedent and he has voluntarily surrendered in the court on 16.7.2009. It is also - 2 - submitted that the petitioner had gone alongwith his family to Gujrat to earn his livelihood and, therefore, he could not appear in the case. The trial of the case was bifurcated with respect to the co-accused, Purshottam Pandey who has been acquitted of the charges. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, Kaila Singh, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No.80 of 2002, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be the close relative or his family member. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)