IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11218 of 2008 RAM NARESH MAHATO @ NARESH MAHATO Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 6 06.08.2008 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State and the informant. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no eye witness to the alleged killing. It is further submits that police after investigation submitted the final form against this petitioner, however during trial petitioner was summoned under section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is further contended that charge sheeted accused namely Deo Narayan Mahto @ Deojee Mahto, who was alleged to have gone with the deceased on the motorcycle and thereafter he returned with the dead body of the deceased and was bringing the body from rickshaw at the house of the informant and while bringing down the body from the rickshaw this petitioner was alleged to have assisted him, has been allowed bail by this Court as per the order dated 05.02.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 149 of 2008. Learned counsel appearing for the informant, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has been summoned since during the trial evidence has come disclosing the complicity of this petitioner. It is further submitted that the said co-accused Deo Narayan Mahto was allowed regular bail, and as such, this petitioner is not entitled to be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail. It is submitted that by order dated 30th April, 2008 as a measure of interim protection, the petitioner was allowed anticipatory - 2 - bail and pursuant to the same he surrendered and was released on bail. Considering the submissions, as noticed above, and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 30th April, 2008 granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)