IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29970 of 2008 RINKU RAM Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 24.9.2008 Heard. While refusing the prayer for bail of the petitioner the learned Judge, who was acting as Sessions Judge Incharge on 3.7.2008, appears making an observation which could in fact be the criticism of judicial order passed by a Judge of a coordinate jurisdiction and that too without any basis. If one peruses the order passed in Bail Petition no.295 of 2008, this appears an unprecedented act inasmuch as not perusing the case diary is completely controverted by perusing the order passed in Bail Petition no.295 of 2008. It discussed the relevant record and then there was a direction issued for releasing the petitioner Sahendra Ram on bail. This appears to have been done intentionally by the Judge in order to conceal his inefficiency. This Court deprecates the behaviour of the Judge of criticising the order of a Judge who is enjoying coordinate jurisdiction. On the very fact of the case specially the fact that the cow was not recovered from the possession of the petitioner, who is also not named in the F.I.R. and whose name appears in the confessional statement of Sahendra Ram, who has been granted bail by the lower court itself, as indicated above, let petitioner named above be released on bail on furnishing personal recognition bond of Rs.500/-(Five hundred only) without any surety to the satisfaction - 2 - of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur, Bhabua, in connection with Durgawati P.S. case no.37 of 2008. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the officer, who was holding charge of the office of the Sessions Judge on 3.7.2008. sudip ( Dharnidhar Jha,J )