IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39111 of 2008 DIWAKAR SAH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner: Mr Pankaj For the State: Mr Arun Kr Singh I, A.P.P. ---------- 2 25.11.2008 Heard. There is nothing in the petition to show that the petitioner was working in any capacity under any contractor of Steel Authority of India Limited. I enquired from the learned counsel for the petitioner whether the petitioner seeks time to file supplementary affidavit to bring any document on record in support of the contention that the petitioner was engaged as a worker by a contractor of Steel Authority of India Limited. The answer was, on instruction already taken that there is nothing in the possession of the petitioner to establish the same. The petitioner has produced a letter allegedly written by Steel Authority of India Limited by which the petitioner had been appointed at the branch office of the Steel Authority of India Limited at Patna. The application does not inspire grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application fails and the same is dismissed. shahid (Barin Ghosh, J) - 2 -