IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39827 of 2009 YOGI SAHANI, son of Daroga Sahani, resident of village Khanpipra, P.s. Phenhara, District East Champaran (Motihari) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 19.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The petitioner faces prosecution for offence u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code with an allegation that he had initially given orders on which co-accused Mahendra Sahni had given the fatal blow on the deceased, whereafter the petitioner alongwith others also had assaulted the informant who also claims to have sustained bleeding injury on his head. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the case against the petitioner by the police has been found to be only to the extent of an order giver and that there is no injury report of the informant Suryadeo Sahni which would make even the petitioner prima facie liable for causing injury on his person. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is a 67 years old person and has got no criminal antecedent. 2 Taking aforefacts into account, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner if he has only an allegation of an order giver. On the other hand, if it is found that there was also injury on the person of the informant Suryadeo Sahni by way of injury report in the case diary, the petitioner cannot claim his bail by virtue of his being only an order giver. Since the court below while considering the prayer for bail of the petitioner has not looked into this aspect, this Court would direct the concerned court to look into the case diary and if it is found that there is no injury report of open head injury on the informant Suryadeo Sahni the abovenamed petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M., Sikarahna at Motihari in Phenhara P.S.Case No. 12/2009, but if on the other hand there would be also injury on the head of the informant, the petitioner for the time being will not be released on bail till he would complete one 3 year of his judicial custody. It goes without saying that not only the bailor of the petitioner would be his close family member but he would also remain present as and when he is required to appear before the trial court and his absence for two consecutive dates will make him liable for cancellation of his bail. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/