IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 19505 of 2011 Binay Kumar Sao @ Birju, S/o Late Ram Prasad Sao. Versus The State of Bihar ---------------- 03. 21.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was refused bail by order dated 16.07.2010 since he was arrested with the stolen Bolero vehicle. The prayer has been renewed on the ground that he is in custody since 23.02.2010 and the case is not proceeding satisfactorily. A report was called for from the Trial Court about the stage of trial and it appears that out of three accused persons one was permitted to be produced before the CJM, Dhanbad in another case and he has not been produced before the Trial Court as yet but the petitioner was being regularly produced from jail. The other co-accused persons were not being produced despite the reminders to the respective jails. The submission of the petitioner is that he has fair antecedents and is ready to comply with any condition i.e. laid down by the Court. In view of the nature of offence as also the stage of trial, let the petitioner, above named be released on bail 2 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand) with three sureties of the like amount each or any other surety as fixed by the Court to the satisfaction of Sri Parbal Dutta, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (or its successor) in connection with Wazirganj P.S. Case No. 39 of 2010 (Tr. No. 1931 of 2010) subject to the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors shall be local since the petitioner belongs to Dhanbad (Jharkhand), the other bailor shall be Govt. servant and the third bailor shall be the brother of the petitioner namely Raju Kumar Sao. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner. (ii) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not an accused in any other case and if he is he shall not be released on bail. (iii) That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse. (iv) That the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse. (v) That the 3 petitioner will be physically present on each date of trial and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, his bail shall stand automatically cancelled. The Trial Court is directed to take appropriate steps for appearance of the co-accused if they are not being produced from the Dhanbad Jail. From henceforth, the Trial Court shall consider allowing the production of an accused in another case only after framing of charge on an undertaking by him that he will not object to the evidence being taken in his absence in presence of his Advocate. Vikash/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)