IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13932 of 2009 VIKKY KUMAR, son of Sukhnandan Rai, resident of Ripapul, P S – Danapur, District – Patna. _____ Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR _______ opposite party ----------- 02. 21.07.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Petitioner is an accused under the Arms Act in relation to Danapur P S Case No. 231 of 2008. FIR was lodged by an Inspector of Police cum S H O, Danapur stating that on secret information he reached the place what is known as Peepapul, saw two persons in suspicious circumstances and on seeing the police they tried to run away but were apprehended and one country made pistol and two live cartridges each were recovered from the possession of the petitioner as well as other person. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is in custody since 11.8.2008 and it is a case of false implication by the police but the submission is not reflected from the record of the case. Looking at the nature of the recovery and the period petitioner spent in custody, let the petitioner Vikky Kumar be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S P Shukla, Judicial Magistrate, Danapur in Danapur P S Case no. 231 of 2008 with a direction that one of the surety will be executed by the father of the petitioner namely, Sukhnandan Rai on due - 2 - identification by the court below. It is further recorded that petitioner shall appear before the trial court on each and every date and shall not evade the law. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)