IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5174 of 2010 ALIAM, son of Mujeep Mian, R/o Lakhanpur, P.S. Mashrakh, District Saran …………. Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR ….. Opposite Party ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Uma Shankar Pd. Singh, A.P.P. ---- 3 23.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 341, 323, 448, 380, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. According to the allegation as set up in the first information report, petitioner and others committed trespass of the house of the informant with intention to commit theft and also caused fire arm injury upon her nephew. It is submitted that the petitioner is neighbour of the informant and wife of the injured has stated that Saheb Mian has fired causing fire arm injury upon her husband and she also allegedly identified the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner is not the assailant. Petitioner is stated to 2 be in custody since 23.10.2009. It is submitted on behalf of the State that it is very difficult to say that the petitioner is not the assailant as the petitioner along with others has committed trespass with the intention of committing theft and firing took place injuring one person. However, having regards to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioner, ALIAM, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 49 of 2009, with a further condition that one of the bailors of the petitioner must be a close relative or family member of the petitioner, who shall file affidavit before the concerned court giving complete genealogy to show his or her relationship with the petitioner. Further the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during the course of trial. If the petitioner fails to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation 3 then the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioner. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)