IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21639 of 2008 SADANAND MANDAL S/o- Amilal Mandal R/o- Village Maheshpur P.S.- Falka, District – Kaithar Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5. 12.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the state. Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences under Sections 33, 42, 42 and 52 of the Indian Forest Act. The allegation against the petitioner is to the effect that of the Shisham tree was cut by the petitioner. During the enquiry, witnesses and local Mukhia have supported the prosecution case . It is further alleged that during the enquiry, no explanation was submitted on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct allegation against this petitioner. However, the villagers including the Mukhia have stated that the petitioner has done the alleged offence. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State opposes the - 2 - prayer for bail and submits that the witnesses including the Mukhia have named the petitioner as the person who has committed the alleged offence. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail on behalf of the petitioner is rejected. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)