IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.57434 of 2007 SHEO KUMAR YADAV @ DOMAN YADAV & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 09.05.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend arrest in a Police case under Section 364/34 of the Penal Code. The submission is that the alleged victim went missing on 3.8.2007. A sanha was lodged on 27.8.2007 when the present F.I.R. has been lodged on 5.10.2007. The allegations are based only on suspicion on the ground that the niece (sister’s daughter) of petitioner no. 1 allegedly had relation with the victim boy much to the dislike of the petitioners. The F.I.R. itself alleges of query from the service provider Airtel and after obtaining the print out of the call details from them of the day of occurrence it is apparent that at 12.35 midnight 17 calls were from Mobile No. 9934914161 and 4 calls from Mobile No. 9304039841 were made on the mobile of the victim. The F.I.R. alleges that these two numbers belong to the mobile connection of the relative of petitioner no. 1. Nonetheless from the case diary at this stage there is no material in the investigation with regard to the ownership of the mobile and the statement of the owners of the mobile. The boy is still traceless. This Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. This application is rejected. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)