IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9787 of 2011 Hira Yadav son of Suraj Yadav Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 3. 13.7.2011. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Sessions Trial No.253 of 2002 arising out of Manjhaulia (Jagdishpur) P.S.Case No.152 of 1998 for the offence punishable under section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. The prayer of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this court vide order passed on 15.6.2010 in Cr.Misc.No.19696 of 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although initially the victim had named several persons being his kidnappers but in a subsequent statement given on 27.11.1998 under section 164 Cr.P.C., he stated that the earlier statement was given under influence of the local villagers. He further submits that the informant, who is the brother of the victim, himself has stated that his brother did not disclose the names of any of the kidnappers and that his 2 brother was traceless since 4 to 5 years. He thus submits that in the aforesaid circumstances and in the background that the petitioner has remained in custody since 4.5.2010, his prayer may be considered. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel, let the petitioner Hira Yadav be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-IV, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Sessions Trial No.253 of 2002 arising out of Manjhaulia (Jagdishpur) P.S.Case No.152 of 1998, subject to the conditions that: (i) the father of the petitioner would stand as one of the bailors and would be under a duty to inform the court below in case the petitioner after his release in the present case is found involved in any further case of similar nature and whereupon the court below would be entitled to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner and take him into custody; (ii) the petitioner would also be under duty to personally attend the trial on each and every date fixed in the case and the failure 3 on his part to attend the trial on two consecutive dates without reasonable explanation to the satisfaction of the trial court, would entitle the trial court to cancel his bail bonds and to take him into custody. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)