IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28278 of 2008 TETAR MAHTO Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 29.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is in custody for an offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in Fatuha P.S. Case No. 616 of 2008 According to the prosecution story the informant, namely, Ashish Nath Mahto gave a fardbeyan on 7.11.2007 that he was sitting with his father when the petitioner Tetar Mahto came to his house, talked to his father and went towards N.H.30 with his father. After some time hulla was raised that his father has been murdered and accused Tetar Mahto was seen running from the place of occurrence. In the order of rejection passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge he has categorically recorded that evidence has come in the case diary in support of the prosecution case. In that view of the matter the petitioner does not deserve indulgence for bail. Looking at the seriousness of the allegation and the case this application is rejected. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)