IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24425 of 2008 LAL MOHAMMAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 21.7.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Siwan Town P.S. Case No.27/2008 for the alleged offences registered under sections 420, 258, 260 and 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that although on the court fee stamp, which was affixed on the requisition filed by the Bank, the signature of the petitioner is affixed with seal over the same, but the same is not correct which the petitioner denied in response to the show cause notice issued to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the genuineness of the alleged court fee stamp was not examined before filing of the case. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand, submits that on verification it was found that the alleged 2 court fee stamps were not issued by the Treasury. Court fee stamps affixed over the requisition were filed with the signature of the petitioner over the same. Out of 48 such fake Court fee stamps, different requisitions were filed having the court fee stamps bearing the signature of other stamp vendor. Considering the submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is, accordingly, rejected. However, in case the petitioner surrenders and makes an application for regular bail in the court below, the same shall be considered, if possible, on the same day, on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)