IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22391 of 2009 ROSHAN MIYAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 21.07.2009 Heard both sides. This matter reflects misuse of the privilege of bail. Petitioner was made accused sometimes in the year 2000 for an offence punishable under section 395 of Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that he was granted bail on merits by the court below on 28.11.2000. Thereafter the petitioner continued to appear in court till September, 2007. His bail bonds were cancelled as he defaulted in appearance on 19.9.2007. Learned counsel submits that he was thereafter arrested on 13.7.2008 and since then he is in custody. Learned counsel fairly states before this court that appropriate conditions, as deemed fit by the court, may be imposed. It is also stated that the trial is under way. Learned APP submits that the petitioner should be imposed conditions in order to ensure that he never hereinafter ventures to jump away. In the facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioner abovenamed 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 learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-IV, Samastipur in connection with Tajpur P.S. case no. 143 of 2000.subject to the following 2 conditions: (i) One of the bailers shall be either mother (deponent of the present affidavit) or brother of the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner shall appear on each date in person in the trial court. In case of default in his such appearance without compelling reasons therefor, the Trial Court shall cancel the bail bond of the petitioner and secure his arrest in accordance with law. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )