IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.48777 of 2008 GUDDU RAI @ VIJAY BAHADUR @ VIJAY BAHADUR RAI, SON OF LATE BASHISTH SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DUMARAHAR (BUZURG), P.S. DARAULI, DISTRICT- SIWAN …….PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ….. OPP. PARTY For the petitioner:- Mr. Bindhiyachal Singh, Advocate & Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Advocate For the State:- Mr. Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P. ----------- 02 23.12.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner is facing prosecution under Sections 341 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not named in the First Information Report. Charge-sheet was also not submitted against the petitioner. However, during the course of trial P.W.1 Madhusudan Rai and PW.2 Baijnath Rai have named the petitioner alongwith few others including Kedar Rai and the statement is only to the extent that they have seen him with Arms. But, according to the learned counsel even in the aforesaid deposition no specific statement regarding any overt act has been made against the petitioner. He contends that it is apparent from the cross-examination of aforesaid witnesses that they had informed the Police regarding the aforesaid allegation upon petitioner. Still, during the course of investigation neither the petitioner was made an accused nor was any protest petition filed by the informant. Further contention is that Kedar - 2 - Rai has been granted bail by a Bench of this Court. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Police case is of the year 1997 and petitioner’s name has cropped up during the course of trial in 2005 and thereafter on a petition filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. he has been made accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State submits that during the course of trial two witnesses have named the petitioner. One has stated that he was armed and going towards the place of occurrence prior to the incidence. Another has seen him coming after the occurrence. However, he also admits that there is no allegation of any overt act even in the aforesaid deposition. In the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner namely Guddu Rai @ Vijay Bahadur @ Vijay Bahadur Rai 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 Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-F.T.C.-III, Siwan in connection with Sessions Trial No. 154/1998 arising out of Guthani P.S. Case No. 12/1997. P.K. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)