IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15573 of 2010 MANOJ RAI, Son of Late Sohan Rai, resident of Village- Tharha, P.S. Maranga,O.P. District- Purnea.............................................Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR..............................................Opposite Party. ----------- 3. 08.07.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State. The petitioner is languishing in jail since 01.02.2010 in connection with a case registered under Sections 395 and 397 of the I.P.C. The petitioner’s involvement sprang up on confession of the co-accused. It is submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no recovery from the petitioner and the petitioner has not been put on T.I. Parade. This contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has not been controverted by the learned counsel for the State. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is involved in one another case apart from the present one under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code in which the petitioner is on bail. Considering the fact that the 2 petitioner’s name sprang up on confession and neither there is any recovery nor the petitioner has been put on T.I. Parade, let the petitioner, Manoj Rai, 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 Additional District and Sessions judge, F.T.C. III, Katihar, District-Katihar, in connection with Korha P.S. Case No. 51 of 2004, Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2010. It is made clear that the learned court below is at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner if he fails to appear on three consecutive dates or he gets himself involved in any such case. U.K. (Dinesh Kumar Singh,j)