IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26872 of 2009 MD.ARMAN ANSARI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 17.08.2009 Heard both sides. Sole petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under Section 392 of the Penal Code. As per allegation in the F.I.R., the informant was robbed of his motorcycle, mobile phone and cash at gun point while he was moving on the said motorcycle. F.I.R., thus, has been lodged against unknown. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that one of the co- accuseds, namely, Laden made a confessional statement before the police which led recovery of the motorcycle from a tyre repairing shop which belonged to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner runs a tyre repairing shop, and as such, he cannot be held liable. Looking to the materials on record, this court is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected. However, petitioner is granted liberty to renew prayer for bail if the trial in the meanwhile is not taken up within 08 months from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order in the court below. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)