IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.438 of 2011 NAVLESH PATHAK . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. . ----------- 02. 26.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State as also Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha, Standing Counsel, for the CBI. The petitioner has approached this court through this writ petition aggrieved by the order dated 8th of April 2011, whereby his prayer for bail in terms of provision as contained in Section 167 (2) (a)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected. It is submitted that since petitioner had completed more than 90 days in judicial custody and no charge sheet has been submitted and as such, the special Judicial Magistrate was bound to release the petitioner on bail in connection with R.C. Case No. 1 of 2011. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that this writ proceeding is not an appropriate proceeding for redressal of his grievances. Considering the submission of the parties, petitioner ought to have applied for bail in the higher court in terms of the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure instead of filing the present writ application. In this view of the matter, this writ application is not an appropriate forum in the facts of the case and as such, the same is accordingly dismissed. However, in case petitioner applies for bail in the higher court as per the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the same would be considered in accordance with law. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)