IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42814 of 2008 KAILASH YADAV @ KAILASH KUMAR YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 17.12.2008 Heard. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under Section 395 of the Penal Code. It appears that his name transpired in course of investigation on the confessional statement of co-accused Laldeo Yadav. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aforesaid Laldeo Yadav has since been released on bail by this court under order dated 22.07.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22696 of 2008. It has further been submitted that another co-accused namely, Shyam Sundar Yadav has also been granted privilege of bail by this court under order dated 15.10.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. No.39787 of 2008. However, from the records, it appears that the petitioner is involved in two other cases and, as such, he carries criminal antecedent. Considering this aspect of the matter one of the co-accused, namely, Amrit Yadav was refused bail by this court under order dated 23.10.2008 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36662 of 2008. However, while rejecting his prayer for bail this court observed as follows: “In the circumstances, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. His prayer for bail is, 2 accordingly, rejected with liberty to renew after completing one year in jail custody.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in jail custody since 04.03.2008. Having regard to the aforesaid facts, this court is also not inclined to admit the petitioner to bail at this stage. However, as observed in the case of co-accused Amrit Yadav, petitioner is also granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail once he completes one year in custody in connection with this case. With the aforesaid observations, this application stands dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)