IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26187 of 2009 Lal Babu Singh, Son of Shri Bihari Singh, Resident of Village Laxmipur, Police Station Bathnaha, District Sitamarhi. ---------- Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar -------- Opp. Party ----------- 4 2.12.2009 Heard Mrs. Nutan Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and counsel for the State as also counsel for the informant. The petitioner’s implication in a case for an offence under Sections 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act is based on the materials collected in course of investigation primarily on the basis of the deceased being last seen with the petitioner and followed by other materials to show that the deceased in fact was in company of the petitioner and Lal Kishore Mahto before recovery of his dead body. Mrs. Nutan Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, would submit that the fact that the petitioner was not named in the First Information Report clubbed with the confessional statement of the petitioner before police would not make the petitioner liable specially when the other co-accused Lal 2 Kishore Mahto has been granted bail by this Court by an order dated 7.10.2009 in Cr. Misc. No. 21933 of 2009. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner’s case will be altogether on a different footing in comparison to the case of aforesaid Lal Kishore Mahto, inasmuch as, it is the petitioner who was not only seen last by the informant in company with the deceased but in course of investigation it has also transpired that the deceased the petitioner and Lal Kishore Mahto were seen together at the Pan shop as has been stated by the Panwala in paragraph no.33 of the Case Diary. Subsequently, the petitioner unknown to the family members of the deceased is said to have gone to the house of the deceased where he had dined together with the deceased and both of them had also again gone together whereafter the dead body of the deceased was recovered in the next morning and all there things gets corroborated not only from the statement of the family members who have of-course not named the petitioner but then that part is filled up by the confessional statement the 3 petitioner himself and also that of co-accused Lal Kishore Mahto. The extra-judicial confessional statement of the petitioner in which he himself is said to have also admitted to have shot the deceased dead which also gets confirmed from the confessional statement of the co-accused Lal Kishore Mahto and the postmortem report would infact bring the petitioner in the category of main assailant and of-course having a primal role in the alleged occurrence. That being so, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, namely, Lal Babu Singh is hereby rejected. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)