IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32589 of 2008 DHABLOO @ AKARBUL MIAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR - - - - 2 29.8.2008 Heard. The prayer for bail on behalf of the petitioner is in a case under Sections 302 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner is definitely not named as the assailant of the deceased in spite of being named in the F.I.R. as one of the five accused persons. The allegation of firing shots and killing the deceased Md. Kaiyum, is against Md. Khalil and Nasir. The attention of the Court was drawn by learned counsel for the informant to Annexure- A to the counter affidavit which is the F.I.R. of another case bearing Nimchak P.S.Case No. 31 of 2008 which indicates that the deceased was being pressured after the arrest of this petitioner to drop the charges and to enter into a compromise by four named accused persons of that case on the deceased Md. Allidin, the informant of the case in which 2 the petitioner seeks bail which he refused and, as such, he was killed by being shot at. The contention is that this could not be only a case of tampering but the man, simply because he was not ready to yield to the pressure exerted upon him, he was shot. The further contention is that the other accused were repeatedly giving threats to the deceased to face the consequence of not yielding to the pressure and stooping to the desire of the accused persons. If one could considers the provision of bail under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, one could find that a new provision was added by amending that particular Section by Act No. 63 of 1980. Under Sub-section(3)b) the Court may impose a condition that the accused may not commit any offence of similar nature. Thus, indicating that the crime of a similar nature may be a disability for an accused for being admitted to bail. Otherwise also, the settled principle of criminal law is that if there could be a chance of the accused indulging in similar or very serious offence, the court may not grant bail to him. 3 In the present case, the petitioner is in custody in a case under 302 of the Indian Penal Code, of course, without any allegation of killing the deceased but merely because he was arrested and that the very informant who had lodged the case was not yielding to the pressure of the accused, he was killed, considering which, I am not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)