IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6662 of 2009 SHANKAR THAKUR @ SHANKAR KUMAR THAKUR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 8 06.11.2009 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Petitioner has been made accused in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No.139/08 for the offences punishable under Sections 392/411 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Substance of allegation against the petitioner is of robbing the bank to the tune of Rs. 10,46,700/-. It is stated that an amount of Rs. 5000/- was recovered from his possession. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the said amount is hardly an amount which can be connected with the looted sum which was to the tune of Rs. 10, 46,700/-. He further submits that neither the amount nor the petitioner has been put on T.I. Parade and that his name actually transpired by reason of statement made by one Mayanand Yadav. He submits that the Mayanand Yadav had also named two other persons 2 namely Amod Yadav and Vijay Yadav and both of them have been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 172 of 2009 dated 20.02.2009 (Amod Yadav versus the State of Bihar) and Cr. Misc. No. 10123 of 2009 dated 04.06.2009 (Vikash Yadav versus the State of Bihar) respectively. In the said circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the present petitioner is on same and similar footing. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, Shankar Thakur @ Shankar Kumar Thakur be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No.139/08 subject to the following conditions:- (a) One of the bailors would be father of the petitioner who would clearly indicate his relationship with the petitioner and would also be under duty to inform the Court below in case this petitioner gets involved in any further 3 criminal case. (b) That the petitioner would be attending the court below on each and every date fixed and failure on his part to attend the court on two consecutive dates fixed without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the Court below would grant liberty to the court below to initiate proceedings for cancellation of his bail bond and for taking him into custody. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J. )