IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.51443 of 2008 BASUDEO YADAV & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 8.5.2009 Five petitioners have been made accused in a case instituted under Section 302/34 IPC They are named in the FIR with specific allegations. As per the FIR, Petitioner Nos.1 to 4 fired at the deceased causing injuries. So far Petitioner No.5 is concerned, the allegation against him is that he gave orders whereupon other accused persons fired at the deceased. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Police upon investigation of the case did file charge-sheet against some of the non-FIR accused persons, but not against the petitioners. It is further contended that the court has taken cognizance against the present accused persons under order dated 12.9.2008. Referring to several paragraphs of the Case diary it has been contended that several witnesses examined in this case have not supported the allegation inasmuch as the informant in his re-statement in Paragraph-134 of the Case diary has not alleged about the complicity of the petitioners Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail. Referring to a Judgment reported in AIR 1985 SC,965, it has been submitted that normally the court 2 should not grant anticipatory bail in a case which involves commission of serious offences like murder. It is further contended that the petitioners remained absconder in the eye of law for a pretty long time which again disentitle them the privilege of anticipatory bail. Having considered the submissions, this Court is not satisfied that a case for anticipatory bail is made out Application is, accordingly, rejected. SKBOSE (Kishore K.Mandal)