IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.36059 of 2008 RAJESH RAI @ SUNIL RAI @ MAHESH RAI @ RAJESH YADAV ……. PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR …….. OPP. PARTY For the petitioner : - Sri Sunil Kumar No. III, Advocate For the O.P. : - Sri D. Mehta, APP ----------- 3. 12.11.2008 Heard Sri Sunil Kumar No. III, Advocate for the petitioner and Sri D. Mehta, APP for the State. The petitioner is in custody in a case under Section 392/411 of the IPC, which related to the commission of theft of a motor at gun point as also some properties of the informant, like, a Nokia mobile set, driving licence etc. The informant informed the mobile police party and also another police station in the direction in which the accused persons had run away. It is indicated in the FIR that another man, who was there informed the police through his cellular phone and lodged the information. After sometimes, the police party had reached the place of occurrence and received some information telephonically that some criminals were arrested and the motor cycle has been seized. The informant reached there and identified the petitioner and other accused as persons, who have committed the offence. - 2 - There is a contention that the man, who apprehended the petitioner and recovered the property has neither cited in the charge sheet as a witness nor his statement has been recorded. The further contention is that the petitioner is in custody since 1.10.2007 and there is no tenable material, so as to justifying his confinement. In view of the facts as stated in the early part of the order, this court is not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail. The petition is dismissed. DKS/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)