IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12375 of 2009 RAM NATH YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 22.5.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Petitioner has been in custody since 4.5.2006 for an offence under sections 307, 504/34 of the IPC read with section 27 of the Arms Act in relation to Bikram (Dulhin Bazar) P.S. Case No. 189 of 2003. On the fardbeyan of one Shiv Kumari Devi Bikram (Dulhin Bazar) P.S. Case no. 189 of 2003 came to be registered. Allegation is that the accused named in the FIR for the reasons indicated therein came to the house of the informant, fired indiscriminately and in the same firing this petitioner is supposed to have received bullet injury. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner himself has been a suferer though he has been shown to be one of the persons responsible for the said crime. It is apparent from the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge that the petitioner has also been an absconder and it is only in the year, 2006 he came to be apprehended. In that view of the matter, the Court is reluctant in enlarging the petitioner on bail but on a categorical statement and - 2 - assurance having been given to the Court that the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial, shall appear in person on each and every date fixed in the case and will not further abscond from law, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner, namely, Ram Nath Yadav on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur in connection with Bikram ( Dulhin Bazar) P.S. Case No. 189 of 2003 subject to the condition that one of the sureties will be executed by the immediate family member of the petitioner or a responsible person of the village. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)