IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20655 of 2009 PANCHUA MANSURY @ PANCHUA s/o Khalil Mansury resident of village Phulwariya, P. S. Dhaka District East Champaran…. Petitioners. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 5. 14.12.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner who faces prosecution for offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code has his defence for bail that it was one Kalia, co-accused who had opened fire on the deceased as a result whereof the deceased had died on the spot. Counsel for the petitioner therefore would submit that when the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and there is also no allegation of any specific overtact against him, the petitioner would be entitled for grant of bail keeping in view that he has remained in custody for a period over 10 months (w.e.f. 30.1.2009) Counsel for the State in the light of materials collected in the case-diary would submit that it does not appear to be a case of Section 302/34 I.P.C. inasmuch as there are sufficient circumstances to show that a gang of dacoits including the 2 petitioner had initially had committed dacoity and in course of retreat when there was suspicion in the mind of dacoits that they would be identified by the deceased on account of flashing of torch light he was done to death by a gun shot injury of one of the dacoits whose name has been disclosed to be Kalia. Considering the fact that the petitioner is named as a dacoit and that such murder of the deceased was committed in course of dacoity, this court would not be inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in an offence which is touching the fringe of section of Section 396 IPC, a heinous offence. That being so, the prayer for of the petitioner is accordingly rejected with a direction to the trial court to ensure that if all the accused persons have been nabbed /arrested /surrendered, it will proceed to expedite the trial. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)