IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18089 of 2011 Appu Kumar Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 03 01.07.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant's vehicle went missing. The petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner sprang up on the statement of the witnesses. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the witnesses deposed against the petitioner is non-else than the family members of the informant. It is also submitted that petitioner is involved in one other case and no recovery has been made from the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to co- operate in the investigation. Considering the suspicious nature, 2 let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, 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 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 566 of 2010, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Safik ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)