IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42231 of 2009 PRIYANSHU KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 4.12.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Considering the fact that the allegation against the sole petitioner for offence under sections 25(1-B) A, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act does not extend beyond recovery of one country made pistol from his conscious possession and that the petitioner claims that he has got no criminal antecedent as also that he is in custody since 21.8.2009, would direct to release of the petitioner on bail on completing six months of his judicial custody, i.e., on / after 21.2.2010, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Session Judge, Samastipur in S.T. No.630/09 arising out of Samastipur (T.) P.S. Case No.534/09 with a condition that one of the bailers must be his close family member. It is made clear that if the petitioner is now found to be made accused in any similar case not only his bail shall stand cancelled but he would remain deprived in getting bail till the trial against him would be concluded. It goes without saying that the petitioner must remain present in course of the trial on each and every date and his absence on two consecutive dates without reasonable ground will make him 2 liable for cancellation of his bail. Anilkrsinha (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)