IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.394 of 2010 PRAVIN KUMAR @ PAPPU KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 22.3.2010 The informant’s grand son disappeared while he was with this petitioner and one Ganesh Rai. The witnesses also came to state that this petitioner and co-accused, Ganesh Rai, were seen taking the boy on a cycle ,i.e., connected by other witness at different places. At last ransom was demanded and the petitioner was arrested with co-accused Ganesh Rai, who has confessed the guilt naming this petitioner as one of his associates. This may not be admissible for conviction but it is admitted that this petitioner was known to him and both the petitioner and co-accused Ganesh Rai were seen by the witnesses even with the kidnapped boy, who is traceless up till now. Nothing more is needed. It has rightly been observed by the appellate Court that the release of the petitioner will bring him in association with known criminal co-accused, Ganesh Rai and that has only been made the ground for rejection of the petitioner’s prayer for bail, which suffers from no illegality. Thus, I find that no illegality has been committed by the appellate Court in rejecting the - 2 - prayer for bail of the petitioner and, accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected and the revision application is dismissed at this stage itself. VPS ( Mandhata Singh, J. )