IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43198 of 2010 PRADEEP SAH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 12.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the state. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 24 of 2010 registered under section- 394 of the IPC. Although the petitioner is named in the accused column of formal FIR but the body of fardbeyan of the informant does not contain the name of the petitioner. It is surprisingly enough how name of the petitioner came in accused column of the formal FIR. Moreover, in course of hearing, Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested by the police on 25.03.2010 and he was remanded in the instant case on 26.03.2010. He further points out that one Chinese mobile set and Rs 231/- were recovered from possession of the petitioner. He further points out that it is specific case of the informant that miscreants snatched Nokia mobile phone from him as well as from other persons. Paragraph-16 of this petition contains that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. - 2 - In the aforesaid circumstance, the petitioner, namely, Pradeep Sah 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 in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 24 of 2010 to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas. The learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas is directed to obtain a report from Superintendent of Police, Rohtas as to under which circumstance, the aforesaid peculiarity occurred and if any foul smell is found by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas, then the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas shall take disciplinary action against the person who is responsible for the above-said act. AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)