IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33291 of 2009 SAGAR RAM Versus STATE OF BIHAR with Cr.Misc. No.33564 of 2009 YOGI RAM Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5 01.02.2010 As both the applications arise out of the same F.I.R., they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Heard. The case is under Sections 364(A) and 120(B)/34 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the informant names the petitioners in the FIR, but admittedly he is not the eye witness to the occurrence of kidnapping. It is pointed out that the learned court below, while rejecting the bail prayer of the petitioners has referred to Paras- 23, 24, 45, 47 & 66 of the case diary stating that the complicity of petitioners appears mentioned in those paragraphs, but the contents of those paragraphs do not mention the names of these two petitioners as amongst the culprits. Dr. Indibar Kumari, learned A.P.P. does not point out any material to show specific complicity of the petitioners from the aforesaid paragraphs of the case diary. Under the circumstances, petitioners i.e. (1) Sagar Ram (Cr.Misc.No. 33291/09) and (2) Yogi Ram (Cr.Misc.No. 2 33564/09) are admitted to bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Addl. Sessions Judge cum-F.T.C.III, Lakhisarai in S.T.No.199 of 2009, arising out of Lakhisarai P.S.Case No. 351 of 2008. Jay/ ( C.M.Prasad,J )