IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.45284 of 2010 1. MD. MANNAN son of Md. Abdul Rahman, 2. Md. Suleman son of Md. Abdul Rahman Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR With Cr. Misc. No. 30087 of 2010 MAINUL HAQUE @ MD.MAINUL @ MD.MAINUL HAQUE son of Abdul Gaffar @ Gaffar Ali Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 09.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners, Md. Mannan and Md. Suleman, were refused bail by order dated 16.03.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. 4280 of 2010 since they were named in the inculpatory extra judicial confession of the co-accused. Since the counsel for the informant has apprised this court of the fact that ten witnesses have already been examined during trial, I am not inclined to review the said order. Their application is once again rejected. On behalf of the petitioner, Mainul Haque @ Md. Mainul @ Md. Mainul Haque, it has been submitted that inculpatory statement was retracted by the accused and, therefore, it has no legal evidence. Further submission on his behalf is that he was in the hospital on the relevant date of occurrence and this fact was verified by the Investigating Officer as well. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to petitioner Mainul Haque @ Md. Mainul @ Md. Mainu Haque also. His prayer for bail is also rejected. 2 Counsel for the informant undertakes to produce the Investigating Officer and the Doctor within three months next if he is given Dasti summons with regard to them. In case the informant fails to co-operate in disposal of the case, he shall be adequately dealt with. JA/- (Anjana Prakash,J.)