IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.1193 of 2011 AYODHYA YADAV son of Late Prayag Yadav, Resident of Mohalla- Basudeopur, P.S.-Kharagpur, District- Munger …Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ….OP ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Karuna Nath Sahay, Advocate For the State : Mr. C. Sen Prasad Singh, APP ------------ 3/ 06.04.2011 Supplementary affidavit on behalf of the petitioner is being filed. Let it be kept with the record. The petitioner was refused bail by order dated 29.10.2010 vide Cr. Misc. No. 36657 of 2010, but liberty was granted to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge if his case is not bifurcated. It has been submitted that charge sheet was submitted against some of the accused persons while investigation was pending against the petitioner and, therefore, the case of the co- accused, who were earlier chargesheeted, was committed to court of Sessions and charges were framed against them and the case of the petitioner was subsequently committed to the Court of Sessions and now charges have been framed as well and the trial of this petitioner as well as other co-accused have been amalgamated. In view of such, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each or any other surety to be fixed by the court below to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Kharagpur P.S. 2 Case No.96 of 2003, subject to the conditions (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioner, (ii) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not an accused in any other case and, if he is, he shall not be released on bail, (iii) That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse, (iv) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled. Since this court has repeatedly been confronted with the problem of the proceeding being stalled in the court below awaiting the final charge sheet mainly on the ground of non-arrest of the accused persons, all the District & Sessions Judges are directed to consider giving appropriate directions to the cognizance taking Magistrates to consider proceeding against the rest of the accused persons against whom charge sheet is pending for reasons of their abscondence, if there is material against them which would warrant such a proceeding. The Magistrates should thereafter take care to ensure that the accused are brought before the Court through its processes and proceed in the manner provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3 Let this order be communicated to all the District Sessions Judge through FAX at the cost of the State. JA/- (Anjana Prakash,J.)