IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47143 of 2008 KISHUNDEO MAHTO @ KRISHNADEO MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 20.04.2009 Heard both sides. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case instituted under section 414 IPC. As per the FIR, stolen electrical transformers were recovered from a house allegedly belonging to one Kishundeo Rai. He was, therefore, made an accused in the FIR. During investigation, it has been revealed that although the premises belonged to Kishundeo Rai ( an FIR accused) but, in fact, almost 2-3 years ago it was let out to the present petitioner under an agreement duly signed by both the parties. The Investigating Officer, on the basis of investigation, has come to the conclusion that the house, during the relevant time, was under occupation/possession of the petitioner from where stolen transformers were recovered. This Court finds that no good case has been made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The application seeking anticipatory bail stands rejected. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )