IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38589 of 2010 VIJAY GUPTA . Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 2/ 27/10/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The for anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No.414/34 of Indian Penal Code and 47A of the Excise Act was rejected earlier only for the reason that the petitioner had antecedents. Renewing the prayer for bail it is submitted that the co-accused has been enlarged on anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No.11659/10. He also had antecedents. That aspect does not seem to have been brought to the attention of the Court when co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail. Any application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner has already been directed to be considered on its own merits when the grant of anticipatory bail to co-accused in Cr. Misc. No.11659/10 shall also be a relevant factor. The application is dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)