IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23461 of 2009 MD.SHAHABUDDIN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 03.08.2009 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under diverse sections of Indian Penal Code including Section 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. As per the prosecution case, petitioner is said to be one of the conspirators. It is alleged that as many as 07 accused persons named therein entered into the house of the informant and opened indiscriminate firings causing death of the son and servant of the informant. In the concluding portion, it is alleged that the petitioner had earlier held out threats for withdrawal of certain case and also for quitting or severing his relationship with the political party (Bhartiya Janta Party). Looking to the F.I.R, It is clear that the allegation against the petitioner is of hatching conspiracy. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, referring to the averments made in paragraph 6, states that it is the quagmire of political conflict between the petitioner and the informant that his name has been launched in this case as conspirator. It is contended that the matter remained pending for investigation all these years in which at least on two occasions, charge-sheets were submitted against some of the accused persons named in the F.I.R. with specific allegation. The investigation so far the present petitioner is concerned, was allowed to continue. The petitioner is in custody since 2 7.11.2005. Learned counsel draws attention of the court to the statements made in paragraph 8 wherein it has been stated that although the petitioner was in judicial custody since 7.11.2005 and the present case is of the year 2002 but for the first time, prayer was made by the I.O./Police to remand the petitioner in the present case on 18.3.2009. Learned counsel submits that only on 27.6.2009, charge- sheet was filed sending the petitioner up for trial in the present case. Learned counsel, referring to the order placed at Annexure- 2, further submits that co-accused Satyendra Tiwary, who is named in the F.I.R. with an allegation that he fired on the son of the deceased causing his death, has since been granted bail by this court. It is contended that when the petitioner was granted bail in other matters, the I.O. hurried to submit charge-sheet on 27.6.2009 against the petitioner and he was got remanded in this case on 31.3.2009. Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for grant of bail. It is contended that the petitioner is a recidivist. He is facing trial in few cases some of which are of heinous nature. It is further contended that in at least three matters, he has already been convicted by the trial court. Learned Sessions Judge while rejecting the application for bail rightly observed in the order that in cases of conspiracy, direct evidence is hardly to be obtained and mostly the conspiracy angle is decided by the circumstance. Looking to the entire aspects of the matter and keeping in view the fact that one of the main assailants has already been granted 3 bail by this court, I am inclined to admit him to bail In the facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioner above named 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in connection with Hussainganj (Nagar Siwan) P.S. case no. 34 of 2002 subject to the following conditions: (i) One of the bailers will be own/close family member of the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner shall appear in person on each and every date fixed in the Court below. In case of default on two consecutive occasions without any cogent/satisfactory reason, the bail bond of the petitioner shall be cancelled and thereafter the Trial Court will be at liberty to secure his arrest in accordance with law. (iii) The petitioner shall refrain/desist from influencing the prosecution witnesses in any manner. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )