IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34236 of 2008 RAJEEV SINGH S/o- Kapo Singh @ Kalideo Singh R/o- Nayagaon Siromani Tola, P.S. – Parbatta District _ Khagaria Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 18.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case for the offences registered under Sections 364 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the specific allegation of the alleged kidnapping for ransom is against other co-accused namely, Sanjay Singh, Guddu Sanghi and Kanhaiya Choudhary. However, the name of the petitioner has been mentioned in the First Information Report. The allegation that this petitioner is also involved, is baseless. It is further submitted that the victim boy was recovered after two days and he has neither named this petitioner in his examination under Section 164 Cr.P.C. nor in his statement recorded by the police in course of investigation and as such, petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that petitioner is agnate of the informant and residing in the same house. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for - 2 - bail and on perusal of the case diary submits that the material has come during the course of investigation that besides the aforesaid three co-accused persons namely, Sanjay Singh, Guddu Sanghi and Kanhaiya Choudhary, petitioner alongwith other co-accused namely, Nilesh and Manoj was also present when the victim boy was taken away on the motorcycle, as alleged in the First Information Report, and this petitioner alongwith the co-accused Nilesh and Monaj was also talking with them with regard to the alleged crime. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail on behalf of the petitioner is rejected. Jagdish (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)