IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9154 of 2010 VISHWAJEET KUMAR YADAV, S/O-LATE NARAYAN YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- ASAHNI, P.S.-RASULPOOR, DISTRICT-SARAN. …..Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. ISHNATH YADAV, S/O-BUNNI YADAV 3. ASHOK YADAV, S/O-KISHUN YADAV 4. KABBADI YADAV @ JAI KISHORE OJHA, S/O-LATE MANDEO OJHA 5. SATYENDRA YADAV @ SATYENDRA YADAV, S/O-ANPUCHH YADAV 6. CHAKRADHAR TIWARY, S/O-LATE RAGHUNATH TIWARY 7. PUJAKAR TIWARY, S/O-CHAKRADHAR TIWARY ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-ASHANI, P.S.-RASULPOOR, DISTRICT-SARAN AT CHAPRA. …..Opposite Parties. For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukul Prasad (Adv.) For the State : APP. ----------- 02/ 12.05.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State. The petitioner has come here for cancellation of bail granted to respondent nos. 2 to 7 namely Ishnath Yadav (Cr. Misc. No. 35824 of 2009), Ashok Yadav (Cr. Misc. No. 32956 of 2009), Kabbadi Ojha @ Jai Kishore Ojha (Cr. Misc. No. 38678 of 2009) and Satendra Ojha @ Satyendra Ojha (Cr. Misc. No. 37818 of 2009) dated 05.01.2010, Chakradhar Tiwary (Cr. Misc. No. 512 of 2010) and Pujakar Tiwary (Cr. Misc. No. 576 of 2010) dated 22.01.2010 in connection with offence registered under Sections 307, 302 and some other Sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Submission is that a wrong statement was made on behalf of accused persons and so the bail was granted to the O.P. Nos. 2 to 7. 2 Considering the statement recorded by the I.O. during investigation paragraph nos. 141, 142, 162, 163, 74 75 of the case diary. It appears that bail were granted to O.P. Nos. 2 to 7 considering the statements made by the injured persons who have supported the version of Chandrama Yadav which was recorded by the A.S.I. at P.M.C.H. on 12.03.2009 Chandrama Yadav has stated that due to indiscriminate firing of Anil Ojha and Sukhranjan Tiwary death have occurred. After considering the facts that the bail was granted, in view of that matter the petitioner has placed some paragraphs of the case diary from which it appears that the O.P. No. 2 to 7 are not the assailants. Considering this, I am not inclined to interfere with the previous order. This petition is accordingly rejected. kksinha/ (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)