IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2493 of 2011 VIJAY SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 17.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the state. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and it appears from perusal of impugned order that name of this petitioner came in this case in Paragraphs-16, 17, 61 and 84 of the case diary. Admittedly, paragraph-84 of the case diary contains confessional statement of co-accused, Sonelal who has already been granted privilege of bail by this court. So far as paragraphs-16, 17 & 61 of the case diary are concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that at paragraph- 16 of the case diary, the statement of one, Surendra Singh Azad has been incorporated by the I.O. and the said Surendra Singh Azad has stated only to this effect that one, Sonelal and some other persons were found sitting in the shop and aforesaid persons were talking naming the Vijay Singh and one, Harendra Singh. The same statement has been made by rest two witnesses whose statements have been incorporated by the I.O. in paragraph-17 and 61 of the case diary. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submission of the parties, let the petitioner, namely, Vijay Singh be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs - 2 - 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Vaishali (Belsar, O.P.) P. S. Case No. 166 of 2000 to the satisfaction of Sri Avinash Sharma, Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Vaishali at Hajipur. AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)