IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.233 of 2011 MANOJ THAKUR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 04.05.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Though, the petitioner is named in the F.I.R., but, on suspicion, the accusation has been levelled. The suspicion has been raised on the basis of the fact that the petitioner along with others requested the victim to stay in the house where the marriage was being solemnized. During the course of investigation, in paragraph 11 of the case diary, the own brother of the victim made statement that he has seen the accused persons fleeing away from the place of occurrence, the petitioner was armed with dagger. It is also submitted by the informant that the petitioner had illicit relation with the daughter of the 2 deceased. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that if the brother of the deceased would have seen the petitioner and others fleeing away from the place of occurrence with dagger then there is no reason of not naming the petitioner with the same accusation, as has been stated by the brother of the victim in paragraph 11 of the case diary. Considering the fact that other accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, let the above named petitioner, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran in connection with Tukaulia P.S. Case No. 201/2010, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)