IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.6199 of 2010 1. MOHAN SAO @ MOHAN SHA, Son of Kashi Sao 2. Pintu Teli, Son of Ramji Sao 3. Dipu Sao, Son of Late Butan Sao Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 09.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 386, 387 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation of firing is false, since no one was injured. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 do not have criminal antecedent and petitioner no.3 is accused only in one Excise case. Learned counsel further submits that initially petitioners have been implicated in this case as Smt. Kanti Singh, mother of the informant Rajeev Ranjan, contested in Municipal Election of Ward No. 30 against Anita Devi wife of Munna Teli and the petitioners being very close associate of Munna Teli, they have been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that in any view of the matter, compromise has arrived at between the parties. After hearing the parties, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, they will surrender before the court below (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara in connection with Ara Town P.S. case no. 87 of 2009) and seek regular. The same would - 2 - be disposed of preferably on the same day also taking into the consideration that compromise has arrived at between the parties. Let this order be sent through FAX at the cost of the petitioner. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)