IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.667 of 2010 DINA NATH SINGH @ DINA NATH YADAV, Son of Sri Ranjit Singh Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4/ 27.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State as well as informant. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner submits that he purchased a truck in question on 11.12.2000 from the informant Rangila Yadav. He has paid tax till 30th June, 2002. He submits that ownership could not be transferred in his name, as there was heavy tax due on vehicle, prior to his purchase. Learned counsel submits that he has transferred the vehicle to another purchaser. Counsel for the informant submits that petitioner had ensured that he would have the vehicle transferred in his name at the earliest. The informant signed Form 29 and 30 for facilitating the transfer. In view of the nature of the allegations, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. His prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, if petitioner surrenders before the court below [Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar] in connection with Simri P.S. case no. 120 of 2009 within six weeks from today and seeks regular bail, the same would dispose of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)