IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39476 of 2009 SURESH PASWAN . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 2/ 14/12/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a police case under Section- 47A of Excise Act. The defence is on grant of anticipatory bail to co-accused Ram Sanehi Mahto. The allegations are that both were running illegal liquor brewing units. The former has been granted anticipatory bail noticing the submission that he had been named by co-accused apprehended on the spot. The distinction lies in that the co-accused apprehended on the spot were granted regular bail. This Court finds it difficult to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on that ground on principles of consistency alone when the allegations are that he was the owner of the brewing unit, a matter not considered in independence while granting anticipatory bail to Ram Sanehi Mahto in Cr. Misc. No.28159/09. The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Nonetheless, any application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner shall be considered preferably 2 on the day that he surrenders on its own merits, without being prejudiced by the present order, in the light of the fact that co-accused with similar allegations has, in fact, been granted anticipatory bail. Let the order be communicated through FAX to the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Kanhauli P.S. Case No.12 of 2009 at the cost of the petitioner. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)