Jai Prakash Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 26 August, 2011

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Cr. Misc. No.28048 of 2011
                      Jai Prakash Yadav son of late Thakur Pd. Yadav
                                          Versus
                                    The State Of Bihar
                                         -----------

2/ 26.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the

offence under sections 25(1-b), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

Considering that arms were not recovered from the

possession of the petitioner and he is in custody since 29.03.2011,

let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing

bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each or any other surety to be fixed by the court below to

the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, in

connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case No.158 of 2005, 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 and another bailor shall be the wife of

the petitioner. The bailors will undertake to furnish information to

the court about any change in the address of the petitioner, (ii) That

the bailors shall also state on affidavit that they 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
2

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.

The fact that there is only one other case pending against

the petitioner will be verified by the Magistrate before releasing him

on bail.

JA/-                                           (Anjana Prakash,J.)