IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32522 of 2009 RAVINDRA SINGH, son of Tunna Singh, resident of Village-Chaki, Shohagpur P.S. Paroo, District Muzaffarpur. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 13/11/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner is facing prosecution for the offence under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. Mr. Vindhya Keshri Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that even though there was no specific allegation of any overtact against the petitioner in the First Information Report save and except of being a member of mob wherein it was alleged by the informant that her son was done to death by Ganga Sahni, Sipahi Sahni and jagarnath Sathi by causing fire arm injury, the involvement of the petitioner on the basis of a statement of husband of the informant under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. recorded almost after two and half years of recording of the First Information Report would not inspire confidence, inasmuch as, the same person was also examined by the police immediately after recording of the First Information Report and in his such statement recorded in paragraph 10 of the case diary the same was to the extent that having seen his son dead by a fire arm injury he had lost his mental balance and he could not identify as to who had caused such fatal injury on his son. He would, therefore, submit that the 2 improvement made by the said Ram Pujan Ram in his statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. by also naming the petitioner alleging that he too had played a leading role in the assault apart from the shooter Ganga Sahni seems to be an obvious improvement in the prosecution story which by itself falsify the allegation against the petitioner. This Court finds some substance in the aforesaid submission of learned Senior counsel of the petitioner, inasmuch as, even when the petitioner was named in the First Information Repot by the informant to be a member of mob there was no allegation of any specific overtact. Moreover the alleged eye witness in paragraph 11 of the case diary had specifically given the names of three persons to have caused fatal injury, namely, Ganga Sahni, Sipahi Sahni and Jagannath Singh as alleged also in the F.I.R. In that view of the matter, when the name of the petitioner as an assailant has emerged only after two and half years in the aforesaid statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C., this Court on an overall consideration of the materials on record would be inclined to grant bail to the petitioner by also taking into account that the petitioner in paragraph no.13 of the bail application has also stated that he has got no criminal antecedent. That being so, this Court would direct for release of the petitioner, namely, Ravindra Singh, on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M. (West) at Muzaffarpur, in Paroo P.S. Case No. 79 of 2006, subject to the condition that one of the bailer of 3 the petitioner must be either of his parents or son or wife. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)