IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39974 of 2007 1. RAJENDRA RAI 2. KAPIL RAI BOTH SON OF GAJADHAR RAI, R/O VILLAGE- GAMHARIA, P.S.- NASARIGANJ, DISTRICT- ROHTAS……….PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. VIJAY KUMAR TIWARY, S/O SRI EKBAL TIWARY, VILL- CHITAWKHAR, P.S.- NASRIGANJ, DISTRICT- ROHTAS ………………OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 4 19/03/2010 Heard the parties. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 14.8.2007 passed in Sessions Trial No. 652 of 2006 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 2, Rohtas whereby the petition under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioners has been dismissed. It has been submitted that except the confessional statement of one co-accused there is nothing against the petitioners. They have no role at all in the alleged kidnapping which is apparent from the case diary available with the record. According to the statement of the victim, no ransom was paid. The victim has already been recovered and at best the material against the petitioners is that they were knowing about the kidnapping. From the statements of the witnesses mentioned in the case diary it appears that the petitioners were knowing that the demand of ransom was 2 being made and this was enough on which the petitioners might have been put on trial. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I find no merit in this application and the impugned order needs no interference. In the result, this application is dismissed. avin (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)