IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8766 of 2010 MD.PAIGHAM KHAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Lakshim Kant Sharma, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ram Priyasharan Singh, A.P.P. ----------- 3 4.5.2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for offences u/s 419, 420, 379/34 of the Indian penal Code, there is allegation of illegal withdrawal of money from the A.T.M. by the accused persons. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is not named in the F.I.R. and merely on the basis of suspicion he has been arrayed in the category of accused, who is running a motor part shop. Learned counsel for the State pointed out that one of the co-accused Biru Pandey in his confessional statement recorded by the police has named the petitioner also as an accused, and has attributed active role against him for committing the crime. Taking into consideration the serious nature of allegation, this court is not persuaded to accede to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. It is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner must surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today in connection with - 2 - Gaya Rail P.S. Case No. 141 of 2009 and, if so advised, seek regular bail which shall be considered and disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. However, while considering the prayer for bail, the learned magistrate may take into consideration other materials available on record including the fact that co-accused Biru Pandey has already been granted regular bail. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. ) M.Rahman