IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3820 of 2009 DIPAK KUMAR SAHNI @ DEEPAK KUMAR SAHNI, son of Sri Lal Babu Sahni, resident of Mohalla Ranighat Gaushala, Katihar, Police Station & District Katihar ------Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 27.3.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Case No.C-II 9/08 for the offences under section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was one of the accused who was taking out the fish plate and other materials of the Railways. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been implicated on the statement of co-accused Dilip Sahani and Sanjay Sahni, who were arrested on the spot with the stolen materials. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as there was a civil suit between the father of the petitioner and father of co-accused Sanjay Sahni, for which a partition suit is pending. It is further submitted that no stolen railway 2 property was found in the possession of the petitioner and as such section 3 of the aforesaid Act is not attracted. The learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is also involved in committing the theft of the Railway property as mentioned in the F.I.R. Considering the nature of the allegations and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to allow this application seeking anticipatory bail. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in case the petitioner surrenders and files an application for regular bail in the court below, the same would be considered on its own merits in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the present order. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)