IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7867 of 2010 1. KAILASH MAHTO, SON OF RAMESHRYA MAHTO. 2. KAMESHWAR MAHTO, SON OF SRI KISHUN MAHTO. BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MOTRAJE, P.S. BATHNAHA, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. ………………………………………………..PETITIONERS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR……………OPPOSITE PARTY. ------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha No.3, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Pushpa Sinha-II, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Ashok Jha, Advocate. ------ 3. 23.4.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered under Sections 302 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 27 of the Arms Act. Submission is that as per allegation the assailant of the deceased is one Vishwanath Mahto, who had contested the Mukhiya election, but in spite of his request, the deceased did not support him and he had earlier threatened him with dire consequences. So far as the petitioners are - 2 - concerned, the allegation is that one of them had exploded bomb, however, it is submitted that there is no splinter injury upon the body of the deceased rather there is only one fire arm injury, which was the cause of death and which according to the First Information Report had been caused by Vishwanath Mahto. Learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that though the co-accused, Vishwanath Mahto, is the assailant of the deceased, however, these petitioners had also accompanied him. Allegation is that one of them had exploded bomb. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the petitioners, namely, (1) Kailash Mahto and (2) Kameshwar Mahto, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection with Bathnaha P.S. Case No.156/2009, with a further condition that one of the bailors in case of each of the petitioners must be the close relative or their family member, who will file affidavit before the - 3 - court below giving full genealogy showing his or her relationship with the petitioners. Further, the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date during the course of the trial in the court below. If the petitioners fail to remain present on two consecutive dates during the course of the trial in the court below without any reasonable cause being shown, the court concerned would be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)