IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.35489 of 2008 RAMAKANT MANDAL @ RAMAKANT SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 17.09.2008 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. Present is a classic example why the bail board of this Court is being burdened unnecessarily by orders of the court below for failure to exercise discretion properly. That the allegations shall stand by themselves to be tested during trial. That the complainant had remarried is an aspect entirely different aspect for the purposes of bail. The court below despite noticing that both the complainant and the petitioner had remarried third persons nonetheless refused to grant anticipatory bail. There are no heinous or serious allegations. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today when he shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of SDJM Rosera, Samastipur in Complaint Case No. 622/2005. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)