IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.593 of 2011 ANIL BIND Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 28.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and during course of the investigation his name surfaced in this case. Allegedly, one looted mobile and rupees two thousand in cash were recovered from possession of the petitioner. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that, as a matter of fact in course of investigation it came to light that one Jai Prakash Bind was using the looted mobile and when the aforesaid Jai Prakash Bind was apprehended he disclosed this fact that the said mobile was handed over to him by the petitioner. It is further contended by him that there is nothing on the record to show this fact that the recovered cash was looted property. It is pointed out on behalf of prosecution that on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner one looted laptop was recovered. Admittedly, the aforesaid recovery of laptop has been made from the possession of one Dadan Bind and not from the 2 possession of the petitioner. Taking into consideration the above stated facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, let the petitioner, namely, Anil Bind be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Sheosagar P.S. Case No.153/2010. PN (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)