IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.91 of 2009 1.ACHHAY THAKUR son of Brij Bihari Thakur 2.Mukhdeo Kumar son of Ramayan Kamkar. Both resident of village-Gangauli, P.S.-Simri, Dist.-Buxar. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Murali Shah @ Murli Prasad, son of late Sudama Sah, resident of village- Gangauli, P.S.-Simri, Dist.-Buxar. ----------- 2. 6.4.2009. Heard. The revision application has been filed against the order dated 2.1.2009 passed by Sri K.P.Verma, Additional Sessions Judge,- I, Buxar granting regular bail to the petitioners on the condition that they would pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) to the informant Murali Shah. Pursuant to the said order the petitioners deposited the amount through chalan. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid order dated 2.1.2009 granting bail to the petitioners would amount to almost believing the case of the informant. The informant has lodged first information report being Simari P.S.Case No.97 of 97 of 2008 under sections 307, 379 and some other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code. One of the allegations was that the accused- petitioners demolished boundry wall also. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this court modifies the bail order dated 2.1.2009 passed by Sri K.P.Verma,Additional Sessions Judge-I, Buxar, to the extent that if the money so deposited by the petitioners and the same has not been withdrawn as yet it would not be withdrawn by the informant. In case money has already been withdrawn by the informant then the same - 2 - would also be subject to the result of final adjudication of the case. With the aforesaid observation this application is allowed to the extent above. Md.S. (S.P.Singh,J.)