IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17942 of 2008 RAJU SINGH RATHAUR @ SURENDRA NARAIN SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 9.7.2008. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is an accused in a case under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B) 26,27of the Arms Act. One Chhote Lal Sahani alongwith this petitioner and about 40 other prisoners were brought from the jail custody to the court Hazat. It is alleged that this petitioner shot Chhote Lal Sahani after reaching the court premises. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prisoners are checked at three points before they board the bus, and as such, it is not possible that the petitioner would have concealed a pistol on his person. Secondly, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pistol was seized and sent for examination to determine whether the pistol was used in the said occurrence but Forensic Science Laboratory has not submitted a report as yet which would demonstrate whether the seized pistol was used in the occurrence. It is also submitted that the father of the deceased Chhote Lal Sahani has filed a complaint case against the police personnels alleging therein that since Chhotel Lal Sahani was a criminal and the Police Administration was against Chhotel Lal Sahani and they have killed him and pinned the blame on the petitioner. I can not accept the aforesaid submission at this stage. - 2 - However, considering the allegations, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail in case forensic report is in his favour. The bail petition of the petitioner is rejected with the aforesaid observations. A copy of the order may be sent to the Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari.. U.K. (Sheema Ali Khan,J)