IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19529 of 2009 HARI NARAYAN @ BHUTTI SAHANI son of Sri Anutha Sahani, resident of village- Bhatahan, P. S.- Muffasil, Motihari, District- East Champaran. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 09.06.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is accused in a case under Sections 385 & 387 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation is that demand of rangdari was made from three different mobiles. The number has been specified in the first information report. One such mobile was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the mobile number of the petitioner differs from the mobile number from which the demand was made. On the other hand, it has been argued that the mobile number is not the important matter rather the mobile used in the crime would be important. In any event, I find that the petitioner has hardly remained in custody for about six months which is too short a period in an offence of this nature. The bail application is therefore, rejected for the present. kanchan (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)