IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.12252 of 2008 LAL MOHAR YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR With Cr. MISC. No. 5576 of 2008 Sri Bind Versus The State of Bihar *** 2 13.5.2008 Petitioner, Lal Mohar Yadav of Cr. Misc. No.12252 of 2008 and Petitioner Sri Bind of Cr. Misc. No.5576 of 2008 are accused in a case instituted under Section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that six named accused along with some other accused persons kidnapped the informant’s son Sunil Sah for the purpose of ransom. Heard the learned Advocate of the petitioners as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate of the petitioners that both these petitioners are not named in the first information report and at a later stage, the petitioner’s names figured amongst the list of the accused persons in this case. The learned Advocate of the petitioners submitted that the prayer of bail of petitioner Sri Bind had earlier been rejected by this Court. The learned Advocate submitted that under similar circumstance, some of the co=-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this court. The learned A.P.P argued that although the petitioners are not named in the first information report but after recovery of the kidnapped person from the house of co-accused Prabhu by the police, the statement of the victim was recorded by the police in which the victim named these two petitioners amongst the kidnappers. He further submitted that the statement of the victim was also recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and in that very statement also the victim named these two petitioners as kidnappers and so, the petitioners do not deserve bail. Considering the arguments of both sides, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and hence, their payer for bail is hereby rejected. BT (Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J)