IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15182 of 2010 RANJAN YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 06.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Initially the F.I.R. lodged against seven accused persons and the petitioner was not named but subsequently the petitioner’s name has transpired as last seen in statement of witnesses recorded in para 20, 21 and 31 of the case diary of which Savitri Devi is the wife of co-accused Ram Babu Yadav. It is further submitted that the police after investigation submitted final form against the F.I.R. named accused persons and the investigation is still pending against the petitioner who is not named in the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the informant however submits that in para 20, 21 and 37 of the case diary suspicion has been raised against the petitioner. Considering the fact that the F.I.R. was lodged with specific case against the seven accused persons which has been found false by the police and it appears 2 that subsequently the name of the petitioner has sprang up as last seen in the company of the victim. The petitioner in paragraph 16 of the petition has stated that he has no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner namely, Ranjan Yadav in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No. 31 of 2010, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr. P.C. Anand Kr. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)