IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7155 of 2010 SURAJ PASWAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 11.03.2010 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The defence on behalf of the petitioner in a Police case under Section 392 of the Penal Code registered against unknown is grant of bail to co-accused in Cr. Misc. Nos. 21968/2009 and 38607/2009, when the former is alleged to have disclosed the name of petitioner. The next defence is that the T.I.P. was belated. The allegations are of train dacoity, the impugned order of rejection notices from the case diary identification of the petitioner during T.I.P. by the witnesses. The petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 21968/2009 acknowledges to have purchased the mobile in question looted in the dacoity when the T.I.P. with regard to him does not arise. The petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 38607/2009 has not been identified in T.I.P. This application is rejected. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)