IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33806 of 2009 Sanjay Rai @ Sanjay Kumar Rai, son of Lakhan Rai, resident of Village- Tikulia Jogbani, P.S. Jogbani, District-Araria. …..Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Surendra Singh S/o Shivram Singh, Resident of Village-Sanjeti, P.S. Jaitpur, Agra (U.P.), Ghandhi Chowk, Matiari, P.S. Forebesganj, District-Araria. … Opposite Party. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Binit Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Upendra Kumar, A.P.P. ------ 10/ 21.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. This petition has been filed for release of the petitioner on bail as he is an accused under Sections 320 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is sole eye witness to the occurrence, namely Ramesh Goswami who had stated that the petitioner along with other accused had come to his village earlier and had threatened him. Subsequently while stating about the date of occurrence he did not name the petitioner among the persons who had arrived at the place of occurrence rather he had named other persons, namely Devanand Jha and Dhirendra Yadav, who were said to have shot at the deceased Arun Kumar Golchha. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that one of the said accused persons, namely Dhirendra Yadav has already been released on bail on the orders passed by a bench of this court dated 03.07.2008 in Cr.Misc.No.23255 of 2008. - 2 - However, from a plain reading of the said order, a copy of which has been produced by the petitioner, it does not appear that it was the same Dhirendra Yadav, rather the name mentioned in the order is Dharmendra Yadav. Furthermore, the allegation of firing at the deceased has not been stated in the said order. Furthermore, it had only been found earlier that petitioner has got very grave criminal antecedents as he was involved in thirteen criminal cases and in most of them charge sheet has already been submitted. Furthermore, earlier petition for bail bearing Cr.Misc. No.32031 of 2007 was allowed by this court vide order dated 28.08.2007, but subsequently the informant filed a petition bearing Cr.Misc.No.47090 of 2007 stating that the said bail order had been obtained on the basis of incorrect statement. Hence, the bail was cancelled in the said case by this court vide order dated 19.11.2008. In the said circumstances, this court does not find it appropriate to entertain this petition which is, accordingly, dismissed. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)