JUDGMENT Mahendra Dayal, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The applicant Shyam Manohar Mishra alias Shyamu Mishra has sought bail in Crime No.1129/2015, under Sections 302, 120B IPC relating to police station Nawabganj, District Bahraich. 3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. After lodging of the FIR, when the informant was interrogated by the Investigating Officer, he again did not name the applicant. After several days of the occurrence, when the informant was interrogated again by the Investigating Officer, he expressed his doubt that the applicant might have been involved in the murder of his son. However, except the evidence of last seen, there is no evidence against the applicant. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and he has no previous criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 09.05.2015. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but it is not disputed that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Shyam Manohar Mishra alias Shyamu Mishra involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions. (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.