IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.10445 of 2010 SUJIT KUMAR SINGH @ SUJIT SINGH @ MATRU SINGH, SON OF SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 05/05/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is not named in the First Information Report as one of the dacoits who committed Bank dacoity but subsequently his name was disclosed in the confessional statement of co-accused. The confessional statement of the petitioner was recorded wherein he stated that he had given part of the looted amount to one Raju who when questioned, stated that he passed it on to one Vishambhar Chaudhary from whose possession the money was recovered. In view of the fact that the petitioner’s statement finds corroboration on recovery of the looted money, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer for bail is rejected. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J.)