IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.10893 of 2011 PANKAJ KUMAR SHUKLA @ PANKAJ SHUKLA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 04.05.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the petition. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 07.04.2010. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in a case registered under Sections 395 and 397 of the I.P.C. The accusation is of committing bank dacoity and his complicity has surfaced during investigation. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that neither the petitioner has been put on T. I. Parade nor any recovery has been made from possession of the petitioner and on mere suspicion he has been roped in the present case. Vide Cr. Misc. No. 6202 of 2011 other similarly situated accused has been granted bail. The supplementary affidavit has been filed to the effect that the petitioner is 2 only accused in two other cases being Motihari P.S. Case No. 120 of 2009 under Sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C. and Hajipur P.S. Case No. 180 of 2008 registered under Section 25(1-b) of the Arms Act. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the 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 the learned C.J.M. Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 406 of 2008. The bail bond of the petitioner will be provisionally accepted. Learned court below will verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner from Motihari and Hajipur and if it is found that the petitioner is involved only in two other cases then only the bail bond of the petitioner will be finally accepted by the learned court below. U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)