IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1692 of 2009 HARI NARAYAN RAM, SON OF LATE HARIVANSH RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- RAMAN DIHARA, P.S.- BIKRAMGANJ, DISTRICT- ROHTAS AT SASARAM ….. PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ….. OPP. PARTY ----------- 05 10.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The offence alleged is under Sections 364 (A), 365/367 of the Indian Panel Code. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. However, during the course of investigation, he been apprehended. It is further submitted that no cogent material has come against the petitioner, who is in custody since January, 2008. Although he has been declared absconder. The learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State, on perusal of the case diary, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that sufficient material is against the petitioner, asmuchas the victim in his statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has specifically named this petitioner as one of the kidnapper. Considering the facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation as noticed above, I am not inclined to allow this application, and as such 2 this application is accordingly rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge-sheet has been framed and as such the trial be expedited. P.K. (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)