IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38164 of 2009 SACHINDRA CHOUDHARY Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 6. 19.07.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner being the retired government servant is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 148, 379, 341, 323, 337, 354, 307 of the I.P.C. and Section 3(x)(xi) of the S.C./S.T.(Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that with the same allegation for the same occurrence another case being Amarpur P.S. Case No. 22 of 1994 has been lodged and in that case the petitioner has been acquitted vide judgment of acquittal dated 26.03.2004 vide Trial No. 386 of 2004 as contained in Annexure-3. The petitioner was not aware about lodging of the present case hence now the bail application has been made. Since the F.I.R. was registered in the year 1994 on that ground alone, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, the learned court below 2 will consider the regular bail application of the petitioner in the background that the petitioner is a retired government servant and for the same occurrence the F.I.R. was lodged being Amarpur P.S. Case No. 22 of 1994 in which the petitioner has been acquitted and will preferably dispose off the regular bail application on the same day. U.K. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)