Judgment 1. Heared the learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner is accused in a case under sections 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected on 6.4.2007 vide Cr. Misc. No. 143/2007. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it has wrongly been recorded/ submitted that the petitioner is named by other co-accused persons mentioned in the order sheet and in fact he is only named by one person i.e., Sitaram Kumar. 5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report nor he is named by the victim under sec. 164 of Cr.P.C. and he has not been put on T.I. Parade. 6. It has further been submitted that other co-accused, namely, Manoj Kumar has been released on bail by this court although, he has been named by several co-accused persons. 7. As stated earlier, I differ from the order of the Hon ble Single Judge as I find that the statement of the accused persons is based on the statement of Sitaram Kumar and on the basis of that statement other persons were arrested in this case. 8. The order dated 6.4.2007 is corrected to the extent that it should be read as the petitioner was only named by one of the co-accused persons, namely, Sitaram Kumar @ Sitaram Yadav in his confessional statement. 9. I find no reason to reconsider the bail application of the petitioner at this stage. There are several materials against the petitioner on the basis of which the petitioner has been detained in custody. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected at present.