IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26299 of 2010 MD.RIZWAN @ CHAND Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 04/ 01.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned P.P. for the State. A dacoity was committed in the house of the informant by some unknown dacoits. In course of investigation, petitioner was arrested and he made his confessional statement. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, at best. section 414 of the IPC is applicable against petitioner and he can not be detained in judicial custody for the offence under section 395 of the IPC. He also points out that co- accused Rukshana Khatoon and Sheikh Gaffar have already been granted bail by another bench of this court vide order dated 13.4.2010 passed in Cr. Misc .no. 10706/2010 but I am not at all convinced with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly, several looted articles were recovered from the house of the petitioner and this petitioner carries some criminal history. It is a serious case of dacoity and looted articles were recovered from the house of the petitioner. So, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case no.7/ 2010 stands rejected. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)