AB 55/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. K. MERUNO Heard Mr. S. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners and also Mr. B.S. Sinha, learned Addl. PP, who enters appearance and accepts notice for t he State. In this view of the mater, no further notice is required for the State . The petitioner no. 1 is the owner of the Truck No.AS-19(A)-9006 and the petitioner no.2 is the owner of Crane-NL-02-G6294. The said vehicles were involv ed in Bijni Police Station Case No.299/2010 under section 379/34 IPC and in this connection, 9(nine) persons were arrested and enlarged on bail by the Court of the Judicial Magistrate 1St Class, Bijni on 14.12.2010. From the order dated 14. 12.2010, the said accused persons were enlarged on bail considering the fact tha t they are day labourers by profession and they have been tactfully utilized by other persons in commission of the offence, and therefore, the accused are allow ed to go on bail. Considering this aspect of the order passed by the Judicial Ma gistrate 1st Class, Bijni and there appears prima facie case against the petitio ners, this Court is not inclined to consider for granting pre-arrest bail and th e accused being the owners of the seized vehicles, which have been utilized in t he commission of the offence, this anticipatory bail application filed by the pe titioners is hereby rejected. However, rejection of this application shall be a bar for the petitioners to approach the Court below for applying regular bail. Anticipatory bail application stands rejected.