IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33317 of 2008 MOHAMMAD BADRUDDIN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 20.10.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case for the offences registered under sections 420,258,260,120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is to the effect that he is involved in business of selling forged court fee stamps which were filed in different certificate cases. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegations are false and stamp on verification of the concerned register in the treasury it would appear that the allegations are not correct. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a patient of different ailments as it would appear from the supplementary affidavit filed in this case. The learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in view of the nature of allegation, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case I am not inclined to allow anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner. However, on surrender, in case any application for regular bail is filed the same should be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. On the same day, if possible, provided copy of the bail application is given to the Public Prosecutor well in advance. Sym ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.) - 2 -