IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17082 of 2009 RAHMAT MIAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 25.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Petitioner is named accused in Darpa P.S. Case No. 33 of 2002 which was instituted under sections 302, 341 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that even according to the allegation made in the first information report, the petitioner had assaulted the informant and not the deceased. It is also urged another accused Rustam Mian was also one of the persons who had assaulted the informant and the High Court has granted him bail recently. Therefore, the petitioner should be given similar indulgence. But one aspect of the matter which must be recorded is that despite petitioner being named to the FIR he has only surrendered to the majesty of law in the year 2008 and there is no explanation for his absence between 2002 – 2008. If that be so, petitioner cannot be allowed to be released on bail without proper conditions having been made in this regard. Let the petitioner Rahmat Mian be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S D J M, Raxaul, Motihari, in Darpa P S Case No. 33 of 2002 with a direction that one of the - 2 - sureties will be executed by father of the petitioner and the other by an elected representative of the village of the petitioner. It is further recorded that petitioner shall appear in person on each and every date during the course of trial and if he breeches the same the court below may consider taking away the privilege of bail granted to him because the trial of the case of the year 2002 cannot be allowed to be prolonged due to non-cooperation of the petitioner. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)