IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.965 of 2010 1. SHAMBHU SHARMA @ TAMBU SHARMA @ Shyam Nand Sharma s/o Samhut Sharma 2. Samhut Sharma s/o Late Saheb Sharma Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4/ 01.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners seek bail in a case instituted for the offence under sections 452, 302, 307, 324, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and section ¾ of the Explosives Substance Act. In an unfortunate situation, an occurrence of explosion of bomb took place in the Civil Court premises, Ara. The informant, who is a lawyer, alleged that he was a witness in Sessions Trial No.659/2008, in which the present petitioners were accused. For this reason 1-1/2 months back the petitioners had allegedly threatened him for which he gave information also in the court below. On the date of occurrence, the said case was fixed for evidence and the petitioners’ were seen by the informant in the Civil Court Premises. At about 11.45 AM, one unknown miscreant came to the Bar Association and suddenly caught hold of one Vinay Tiwari, when a bomb explosion took place. In the said explosion, advocate Vinay Tiwari and the miscreants lost their lives. During investigation, two co-accused persons, namely, Raju Paswan and Munna Sharma, brother of petitioner no.1 and son of petitioner no.2 were apprehended, who disclosed that five persons were involved in the present occurrence but did not name the present petitioners in either planning or executing the same. It also transpired during investigation that Munna Sharma is a - 2 - veteran criminal and indulged in antisocial activities and so far the petitioners are concerned, apart from one case mentioned by the informant in the First Information Report, they are not accused in any other case and the Sessions Judge has committed error of record in the impugned order which fact is borne out from the documents annexed in the supplementary affidavit filed today. In view of the above, let the petitioners, above named, who, admittedly, are not the persons who threw the bomb nor did they plan the occurrence as per the confessional statement of the co- accused, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, in connection with Ara Town P.S. case no.224 of 2009, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioners,(ii) that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioners are implicated in any other case of similar nature after their 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 petitioners will give an undertaking that they will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if they fail to do so on two given dates and delay the trial in any manner, their bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse, and (v) that the petitioners will be well represented on each date and if they - 3 - fail to do so on two consecutive dates, their bail will be liable to be cancelled. In case, at any stage the informant feels that the petitioners are attempting to tamper with the evidence, he will be at liberty to file application before the court below, who will then initiate a proceeding in accordance with law. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)