IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29624 of 2010 SANJAY MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03. 03.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Informant’s father is killed. Admittedly in the night of 24/25th November, 2001. Charge sheet is submitted in the case only about nine years of the F.I.R. Different sets of witnesses including allegations are there implicating different sets of persons. F.I.R. is to the effect that deceased was taken away by this petitioner and Dilip Mahto along with five unknown persons, thereafter firing was heard and informant’s father was found dead. This version is corroborated by the informant and his family members. Second set of witnesses are examined in Paras- 16, 17 and 18 of the case diary that some money was taken by the deceased to transfer part of his land was being opposed by his sons that is further corroborated with some add by witnesses examined in paras-49, 50, 51 and 55 of the case diary as also in paras-70, 71. That apart from this, money taken by the deceased for transfer of his land, he was in illicit relation with his one of the daughter in-laws, he was accused in killing of his wife. So, it is clear that either there is circumstance or suspicion petitioner and another named co-accused Dilip Mahto are not sent up for trial, but circumstance that also strong is existing against them. Accordingly, prayer of petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, petitioner is at liberty to surrender in the court 2 below and pray for regular bail. Vikash (Mandhata Singh, J.)