IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23915 of 2009 SHIV PUJAN SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 6.7.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner has been made accused of a case under sections 364 and 201/34 IPC. According to learned counsel, F.I.R. was lodged after about two years of the occurrence. Final form was submitted finding no accusation against the petitioner and others and only on protest, cognizance was taken and petitioner is apprehending his arrest. Similarly situated four of the co- accused have been allowed anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court. Learned counsel first stressed the maintainability of this anticipatory bail directly before this Court. All the circumstances stated above if are favouring the petitioner that can be well considered by the Sessions Judge also. If the petitioner is allowed to justify his coming first to this Court then why not others, only anticipatory bail directly can be maintainable here can never be allowed to the petitioner to - 2 - ignore the authority of the Sessions Judge, so he is well advised to approach the Sessions Judge, Kaimur at Bhabha in Complaint Case No. 1305 of 2007 raising all the points submitted here which shall be taken into consideration by the said Sessions Judge after hearing the parties. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Let this order be communicated through fax at the cost of the petitioner. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI