IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.9557 of 2010 KISHAN MAHTO @ KRISHAN MAHTO, s/o Radhe Mahto Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 31.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under sections 353 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under various sections of the Arms Act. For an occurrence of one Menon Sahani being attempted to be kidnapped, Pandarak P.S. case no.134 of 2007 under section 364 Indian Penal Code was instituted. When the boat on which the alleged persons was being taken was searched, huge amount of arms were recovered from there and also the occupants of the boat are said to have generally fired but did not injure any one for which the present case under sections 353 and 307 Indian Penal Code and various offences under Arms Act was instituted. The submission is that in the statement under section 164 Cr. P. C., the victim did not name the petitioner and, therefore, was granted bail on merits by this court in the said case vide Cr. Misc. No. No.9397 of 2010. In the present case also, even though the petitioner is named in the First Information Report on the basis of the information having been given by the same kidnapped person, who does not name the petitioner subsequently in the statement under section 164 Cr. P. C., but the merits of the present case would be similar to the one for which he has been granted bail. Moreover, there is no specific overt act against him nor has any recovery of arms been made from the - 2 - conscious possession of the petitioner. In view of such, let the petitioner, above named, who is in custody since 20.4.2009, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barh, Patna, in connection with Pandarak P.S. case no. 135 of 2007, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner, (ii)that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse, (iii)that the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse, and (iv) that the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)