IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.18701 of 2010 SHAMBHU PRASAD SINGH @ SHAMBHU MANDAL Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 28.06.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code. By order dated 18.11.2009, the petitioner was refused bail on the ground that the wife of the petitioner admitted that it is the petitioner, who confined the kidnapped boy in the house for 4-5 days. Prayer for bail has been renewed on the ground that co- accused Raj Kumar Yadav has been granted bail by this court. On going through the records of the case, it is clear that the case of Raj Kumar Yadav is totally different from that of the petitioner, inasmuch, as the said Raj Kumar Yadav is only suspected to have been involved because he was the person who had called away the victim and had tea with him after which he was kidnapped. In view of such, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial in view of the serious nature of the offence. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)