IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6400 of 2011 MUNNA SHARMA & ANR. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 30.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. P.P. Mr. Dashrath Mehta for the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a Complaint Case, in which cognizance has been taken for the offence under Sections 420, 406, 471, 323 & 504 of the I.P.C. The complainant’s son died due to collapse of some bridge under construction. It is alleged against the accused persons that the contractor agreed to make payment of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation, but it was not paid to the complainant. The complainant has admitted in paragraphs 2 & 3 of the complaint petition that these petitioners were labour agents. Accused Nos. 3 & 4 were granted regular bail on the basis of compromise in the present complaint case. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that 2 initially a case registered under Section 304/34 of the I.P.C. when the petitioners were not made accused and the thrust of accusation is against the contractor not against the petitioners. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioners, namely, Munna Sharma and Manoj Sharma, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court-below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate,Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Complaint Case No. C1399 of 2009 subject to condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Mkr. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)