IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.465 of 2011 MUNNA SAH @ JAYNARAYAN SAH & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 04. 09.02.2011 Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a complaint case in which cognizance has been taken under Sections 147, 148, 448, 341, 323, 384 of the I.P.C. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that initially the police case was registered but the accusation was not found true and final form was submitted, then on the protest the cognizance has been taken. It appears that learned Sessions Judge has not considered the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners on the ground that there is a provision for bail under Section 88 of the Cr.P.C. Section 88 of the Cr.P.C. stipulates the power of the Court to take bond for appearance whereas Section 438 CrP.C. envisages the maintainability of the anticipatory bail application on the apprehension of being arrested in a non bailable offence hence the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner has wrongly rejected on the ground that remedies of the petitioner lies under provision of Section 88 of Cr.P.C. 2 Since the accusation was found false by the police during investigation, let the petitioners namely 1. Munna Sah @ Jay Narayan Sah 2. Sujit Sah 3. Jitendra Sah 4. Bilas Sah @ Ramvilas Sah 5. Subhash Hembram 6. Lakhan Hembram 7. Babulal Hembram 8. Rameshwer Hembram 9. Bablu Hembram 10. Tala Hembram 11. Arjun Jaisawal, in the even of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Purnea in connection with Complaint Case No. 1486 of 2006. Shageer ( Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.)