IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.36380 of 2010 AJAY PASWAN @ AJAY KUMAR PASWAN, SON OF SRI NUNU LAL PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NARDAH, POLICE STATION PURAINI, DISTRICT MADHEPURA. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 9.12.2010. Heard Shri Bikramdeo Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri M.K. Khare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner, who is in custody since 13.6.2010 in Puraini P.S. Case No.56 of 2010 for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of bail. It was submitted by Shri Bikramdeo Singh that despite the fact that witnesses in the F.I.R. had disclosed the name of the petitioner as one of the accused, who was apprehended, on chase, the informant in the F.I.R. has not whispered regarding involvement of the petitioner. It was further submitted that petitioner is having clean antecedence and is rotting in jail since the date of his arrest. It was further submitted that the motorcycle, which was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, was of his father. Accordingly, it has been prayed to grant bail. Shri Khare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, while opposing the bail, submits that in 2 N.H./ the case diary, number of witnesses have categorically disclosed the name of the petitioner. It was further submitted that the petitioner, immediately after the occurrence, was apprehended on chase and as such the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail. In view of the facts and circumstances, particularly the nature of the accusation, the court is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail stands rejected. However, if no positive progress takes place during the trial within a period of nine months from today, the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)