IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19380 of 2010 PANKAJ PANDEY, SON OF LATE CHANDRAMA PANDEY Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 6. 28.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that after the deceased was taken away by the co-accused to the house of one Upendra Pandey, the deceased was done to death and his dead body was also recovered. During investigation, confessional statement of the wife of Akhilesh Tiwary was recorded who confessed that since the deceased was aware of the fact of her illicit relationship with Upendra Pandey, the occurence had taken place in which the petitioner has actively participated. Considering the same, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The prayer for bail is rejected. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. It is made clear that the petitioner’s bail shall not be considered in case his case is bifurcated with other co-accused for the purposes of commitment or for charge. At the time of renewing his prayer for bail, the petitioner shall actively state about his criminal antecedents. S.Ali ( Anjana Prakash, J.)