IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14448 of 2010 Ashok Yadav @ Ashok Kumar, S/O Sri Mundrika Prasad, resident of Mohalla Shastri Nagar, P.S. Rampur, District- Gaya ………… Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2.Narendra Kumar Agrawal, S/O Late Rewati Raman Agrawal, R/O Mohalla Laheria Sarai Chowk, P.S. Kotwali, District- Gaya ………… Opp.Parties With Cr.Misc. No.23392 Of 2010 Sanjay Kumar Singh @ Sanjay Singh, S/O Sri Mithilesh Singh, resident of Mohalla- Magadh Colony, Road No.10, P.S. Magadh Medical, District- Gaya ……… Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar ………… Opp.Party ----------- 5. 28/07/2010 Two petitioners have moved this Court praying for reconsideration of their case for allowing them bail after their prayer for bail was earlier rejected by this Court by order dated 18.12.2009 passed in Cr.Misc.No.26302 of 2009, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-1 with both the applications. Heard Mr.Shakeel Ahmad Khan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in the first case, Mr.D.K.Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in the second case and learned counsel for the State. Learned senior counsels for the petitioners have submitted that some wrong facts were placed before this Court earlier and the statements of the witnesses made in - 2 - paragraphs 116 and 130 of the case diary were not correctly placed and because of that this Court did not find the case of the petitioners fit for allowing them bail. They also submitted that the letter of the deceased alleged to have been received by the police expressing fear of life at the hands of the accused persons was not a reliable piece of evidence. They also submitted that the original letter was not produced and signature was not got compared. Mr.Sinha, in addition, has also submitted that the informant and his family members are in the habit of lodging false cases against different persons with the purpose to extract illegal money. Therefore, in sum and substance, they have submitted that the earlier order of this Court was not passed on correct appraisal of the facts and circumstances of the case. The submission of learned senior counsels for the petitioners is in effect a prayer to reconsider their prayer for bail and reappraise the materials available on the record of the case against the petitioners. This Court is unable to do so. Once bail application of the petitioners stood rejected - 3 - on the basis of some materials available on the record of the case against them, it is not appropriate for this Court to reappraise the evidence to consider the bail applications on merits again and pass orders. Both the applications are, therefore, dismissed. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)