IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9086 of 2009 MANOJ MUKHIYA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 13.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has only been named in the F.I.R. though one Satrudhan Mukhiya has been alleged for lathi blow but it was a case for the offence under section 307 IPC only which was later converted under section 302 IPC after the death of the injured but after investigation final form was submitted finding the case true only against Satrudhan Mukhiya but cognizance is taken against this petitioner also basing which petitioner’s arrest at the moment cannot be justified. I agree with the same. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today in Govindganj P.S.Case No.59 of 2007 (Tr.no.2702 of 2008), the above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, District East Champaran, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI