IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.17411 of 2009 1. RAM BABU PASWAN @ LALOO PASWAN 2. Rekha Paswan @ Bimal Devi Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR **** /4/ 07.09.2009 Heard both the sides. 2. Petitioners, who are brother-in-law and gotni of the victim, have applied for bail in a case instituted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. Contention is that co-accused, Ramprit Paswan, who is father-in-law of the victim, has been released on bail by this Court. It is next contended that informant was examined at the trial, but, he has not supported the case. This Court finds that the offence was committed some time in the year 2007. Petitioners are named accused. They did not surrender for a petty long time. They are in custody since 07.04.2009. From the records of Cr. Misc. No. 190 of 2009 it appears that father-in-law remained in custody for about more than a year when he was granted the privilege of bail. 3. Looking to the fact that they are named accused with allegation which finds support in course of investigation and the fact that initially evaded arrest for about a year, this 2 Court for the present is not inclined to admit them to bail. Prayer for bail is refused. This Court, however, can not be oblivious of the fact that one of the co-accused has been granted bail and the informant has not supported the prosecution case at the trial, accordingly, petitioners are granted liberty to renew their prayer for bail after four months from the date of receipt/communication of the order in the Court below, if in the meanwhile the trial is not concluded by examining all the prosecution witnesses. S.A. (Kishore K. Mandal )