IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.355 of 2009 PHULENA SAHANI, son of Narayan Sahani, Vill – Garhara Gorihari, P.S. Barauni, District - Begusarai Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 06.02.2009 Heard. The Sessions Judge, Begusarai has dismissed the prayer for bail of the petitioner but in spite of noticing a decision of this Court cited before him in 1989 PLJR - 867, which directs that if a man was not named in a case under section 395 of the I.P.C., the first thing to be done in the investigation of the case, is to put such an accused on Test Identification Parade and if he is not identified, then he is entitled to bail. I wish that the learned Judge could have understood the meaning and import of the observations of this Court and could have acted accordingly. The petitioner was not named in the FIR and he was in custody since 2.10.2008 as has been noticed by the learned Judge in his rejection order. The petitioner was put on Test Identification Parade but not identified. It further appears from the rejection order that there was no recovery from the possession of the petitioner. The confessional statement of so many accused persons referred to by him, were the only material against the petitioner. Still the learned Judge did not follow the principle of bail as enunciated by this court in the above noted decision and went on to dismiss the prayer for bail. It shows poor knowledge of law of the judge. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the - 2 - case, let petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing personal recognition bond of Rs.500/ (five hundred)without any surety to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Begusarai in Barauni P.S. Case no. 258 of 2008. Anil/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)