IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.16709 of 2011 Krishn Kant Singh @ Tinku Singh Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 4 4.11.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that save and except suspicion there is no evidence in the case. All the circumstances referred or appeared in the case are the statement of mother that the deceased told her that Tinku had called him while he left the house with an unknown boy on Motorcycle that is missing in the F.I.R. In the F.I.R. there is only suspicion. Another circumstance/occasion is that Tinku was seen at some distance where a young boy was with the deceased with Pistol and even threatened the witness examined in paragraph 31 of the case diary who left the place. Third one is confession made by petitioner which according to learned counsel for petitioner is not admissible. In the F.I.R. there is only suspicion caused due to differences developed due to the deceased’s joining some job and deceased was instrumental in obtaining loan from the Bank. 2 Learned counsel for the informant submits about petitioner’s having criminal antecedent about his having involvement in several cases rather a terror of the area but in my view, without involvement basing criminal antecedent refusal of bail is not justified. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 52 of 2011. AI ( Mandhata Singh, J.)