IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15219 of 2010 AJAY KUMAR @ RAJA Versus STATE OF BIHAR with Cr.Misc. No.20257 of 2010 PANKAJ KUMAR SHUKLA @ PANKAJ SHUKLA Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 09.07.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are languishing in jail since 06.12.2009 and 07.04.2010 respectively in connection with a case registered under Sections 395 and 397 of the I.P.C. The allegation is of committing bank dacoity and their complicity has come during the investigation. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that neither the petitioners have been put on T.I. Parade nor any recovery has been made from possession of the petitioners and on mere suspicion they have been roped in the present case. From perusal of the orders, it appears that the investigating officer as well as supervising officer has found the complicity of these petitioners in the offence. In view of nature of allegation, I am 2 not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. The bail application of the petitioners is rejected. U.K. (Dinesh Kumar Singh,J)