1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27447 of 2008 DHANRAJ SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 20.08.2008 Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case for the offence registered under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the FIR is against unknown . After investigation sessions trial was held in which the co-accused were acquitted as per the judgment dated 26th of February 2003. Copy of which is annexed as Annexure-2. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been made accused on the confessional statement of co-accused Surendra Yadav who was acquitted in the said sessions trial. The petitioner learnt about his involvement in the year 2008 when steps under section 82 of the Cr.P.C. were taken against him. Learned A.P.P., on the other hand submits that petitioner after knowing the criminal proceeding, he himself was evading and after long delay when the steps were taken against him Under section 82 of the Cr.P.C. he approached this court for anticipatory bail. As regards the acquittal, it is submitted that petitioner is not facing trial. Therefore, the deposition of the informant that he did not identify any of the accused does not cover this petitioner. Considering the above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail is rejected. If the petitioner on surrender before the court below makes 2 an application for bail, the same will be considered on its own merits without being prejudiced by this order of this court. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)