IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31905 of 2009 SURENDRA CHAUDHARY, Son of Bindeshwari Chaudhary, resident of Village-Ranginia (Chairman School Shiksha Samiti), P.S. Salkhua (O.P.Chiraiya), District-Saharsa. Versus STATE OF BIHAR With Cr.Misc. No.32797 of 2009 RAJENDRA SINGH @ BONU SINGH Son of Late Ghugli Singh, resident of Village-Boharuba, P.S. Salkhua, District-Saharsa., Versus STATEKL OF BIHAR ----------- 2 9/9/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners in both the cases as also counsel for the State. Petitioner Rajendra Singh @ Bonu Singh (petitioner in Cr. Misc. No.32797/2009) has been found to be not a man of having criminal antecedent but in the case diary it has come that he was the brain behind the alleged kidnapping. Though he has not been named in 164 Statement of the victim, his involvement has emerged in the statement of other witnesses before the police, who have named him to have played role in this occurrence which cannot be disbelieved at this stage. That being so, prayer for bail of petitioner Rajendra Singh @ Bonu singh is rejected for the present. He may renew prayer for bail after remaining in a judicial custody for the period of one year. As with regard to petitioner Surendra Choudhary (petitioner in Cr. Misc. No.31905/2009), it has been submitted that though he has been named in the First Information Report and also 2 named in the statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C, but such allegation is only by way of suspicion. Counsel further submits that petitioner Surendra Chaudhary was Chairman of the School Education Committee and the Informant is a teacher and therefore he had some rivalry which led to false implication of the petitioner Surendra Chaudhary. There is however nothing on the record to show that the petitioner Surendra Chaudhary in the capacity of Chairman of the said Committee has initiated any action or taking any steps against the Informant of this case. A public petition containing the name of petitioner Surendra Chaudhary as well can hardly be an evidence of previous enmity because the Informant did not make any allegation against other persons who had filed public petition against him. Considering the fact that there are materials against the petitioner Surendra Chaudhary the case diary and there was also some sort of information against him even in the statement of victim, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to petitioner Surendra Chaudhary. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected for the present He may, however, renew his prayer after completing judicial custody for a period of one year. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)