IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.49159 of 2008 MUKHTAR SIDDIQUI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 8.12.2008 Heard Sri Md. Shakil Ahmad Khan, Senior Advocate for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Bhabua who dismissed the prayer for bail of this petitioner has noted ‘that this petitioner is responsible for causing the dis- appearance of evidence for the alleged offence of rape committed by his brother’. The learned Judge appears not encourage even after such record of fact to direct the release of the petitioner. The court could not know the circumstances which could prevail in the mind of the learned Judge to depart from the usual practice of directing the execution of the bond so as to releasing an accused of such offences. Could it be incompetence or anything which could be extraneous to such considerations? The matter be referred to the Administrative side of the Court as the order of the Additional Sessions Judge refusing lawful prayer is simply unprecedented and against the principles of law. - 2 - Let the above named petitioner be released from custody on furnishing bond of Rs.1,000/-(one thousand)with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhabhua in Bhabhua P.S.case No.291 of 2008. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )