IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11507 of 2009 ANUJ KUMAR RAI, son of Vishwanath Rai, village Akilabad, PS Sadar, district Vaishali – Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 5.5.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.12.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge, FTC II, Vaishali on the ground that apart from suspicion there is no reason why this petitioner should have been dragged as an accused in the case. The prosecution case briefly stated is that the Collector, Vaishali along with his escort party was returning from the district head quarter of Hajipur at around 10.30 PM in the night when the party was attacked. After the occurrence took place, information was sent by the escort party to several police stations. In the mean time the Subdivisional Officer and other officers also came at the place of occurrence along with other police jeeps. While enquiry was being conducted from the villagers who had gathered at the spot, two cars came to the place of occurrence. One was a Maruti Van and the other was a Sumo. The Maruti Van left in a hurry, whereas, the Sumo stopped and when asked as to why he was there, he ran from the place of occurrence. Later he was caught. It is alleged that the petitioner was one of the persons somehow involved in the occurrence who had come to check the success of the mission. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such submissions are broad based and the prosecution is not in a position to show that the petitioner was in league or involved with the main culprits. At this stage, I am not inclined to interfere in this matter as the court cannot appraise the evidence and decide issues which are required to be ascertained during the trial. This application is dismissed. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)