IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16573 of 2010 AVINASH KUMAR son of Sri Sugriv Singh, resident of village Navi Nagar, Police Station Nawadah, District Nawadah, … …Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR … OPPOSITE PARTY For the Petitioner: Mr. Birju Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar No. II, APP ----------- 4 11.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Perused the report of the trial court, kept at Flag ‘A’. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for offences punishable under sections 392 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner’s prayer for bail had earlier been rejected by this Court vide order dated 26.10.2009 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36340 of 2009. Petitioner has tried to explain the matter with regard to recovery of money from his house by annexing some document to show that some part of amount was withdrawn from Bank earlier to the aforesaid recovery. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that from the entry made in paragraph 116 of the Station Diary of Nawadah Police Station, it would appear 2 that at about 23.50 PM the petitioner after being taken into custody was sent to Begusarai with the Begusarai Police, however, in fact, recovery has been shown to be at 11.00 AM on the next day i.e. on 05.07.2009, though the petitioner was admittedly arrested on 04.07.2009, thus, it raises serious doubt with regard to recovery of the mobile phone from the possession of the petitioner. That apart, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is in custody since 04.07.2009 and from the report of the trial court, it appears that even after lapse of one year charges could not be framed. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the error in the seizure list is merely technical one and the fact is that the mobile phone had been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. However, he could not point out as to although the petitioner was admittedly arrested on 04.07.2009, why there is no whisper in the Station Diary of Nawadah Police Station regarding any seizure and why the concerned seizure/recovery has been shown at 11.00 AM on 05.07.2009, when admittedly the petitioner was arrested and forwarded to the custody of the Begusarai Police at 23.50 PM on 04.07.2009 itself. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner also pointed out the fact that though admittedly, the petitioner was already sent to Begusarai on 04.07.2009 at 23.50 PM but the seizure has been shown to have been made by the Nawadah Police on 05.07.2009 when the petitioner was at Begusarai. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the abovenamed petitioner, AVINASH KUMAR, to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, F.T.C. Ist, Begusarai, in Sessions Trial No. 80/2010 arising out of Begusarai Town in Police Station Case No. 247/09 with further condition that one of the bailors must be close relative or family member of the petitioner, who shall state on affidavit before the court concerned, giving complete genealogy, as to how he or she is related with the petitioner. Further, after his release, if the petitioner is again found involved in similar kind of offences, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. It is made clear that the concerned trial court 4 would proceed with the trial and conclude the same on its own merit without being prejudiced by any of the finding recorded or observations made by this Court in this order. SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)