IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.51531 of 2008 SONU KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5 27.8.2009 In this case on account of non- availability of the main records, certain confusion had been caused which now, however, stands resolved on verification from the connected records and other entries. It is apparent that an order in the date of 27.3.2009 was pronounced rejecting the prayer of bail of the petitioner, whereafter, on prayer of the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner the case was again placed under the heading “for orders” on 31.3.2009 on which day this Court had recorded no further orders need be passed. In effect, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail stands rejected and, therefore, all that the office is now required to do needful treating it to be a disposed case. The copy of aforesaid orders dated 27.3.2009 and 31.3.2009 may also be communicated to the court below for follow up action. Office may also create a shadow record for which the counsel for the petitioner has 2 already furnished copies of the bail application. Since the case diary called for was also tagged along with the original record which has since been missing, this Court would direct the Superintendent of Police to prepare an additional copy of such case diary. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)