- (1.) THE petitioner is in custody in connection with the case registered under Sections 363/366(A)/372/354/34 IPC.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; even if the entire allegation is taken as it is, it does not constitute the alleged offences against the petitioner; the only allegation is that the petitioner had arranged railway ticket and the victim had heard the name of the petitioner while the main accused was talking on Mobile; nothing incriminating has been recovered from the petitioner's possession; the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent; the petitioner is in custody since August 2010 without any cogent basis; the petitioner is a local permanent resident and there is no chance of his absconding. Learned A.P.P opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail. However, after going through the Case Diary, he has not disputed the said factual contentions submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the C.J.M, Hazaribagh in connection with Barkagaon (Urimari) P. S. Case No. 104/10, corresponding to G. R. No. 2159/10.;