IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.33033 of 2009 Mohan Prasad Sah, son of Late Shankar Sah, resident of village- Dighikala, P.S.-Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali. ……..Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Smt. Sanju Kumari, wife of Sri Vishnudeo Rai. 3. Vishundeo Rai, son of Late Gaun Rai. (Both residents of village-Neelkanthpur, P.S.-Mahua, District- Vaishali) 4. Ram Jatan Singh, son of Late Sitaram Singh, resident of village- Rahimapur, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali. ………Opposite Parties. ----------- 3. 22.11.2011 The complainant-petitioner has preferred this application against the order dated 16.07.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in A.B.P. No.915/2009 by which the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 have been granted anticipatory bail in connection with complaint case no.3571/2008 under Sections 420 and 406/34 of the I.P.C. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that opposite party nos. 2 to 4 have been granted the anticipatory bail after giving wrong fact before the learned Sessions Judge. The learned counsel for the State submits that more than two years have passed after passing the impugned order. However, he may raised his grievance 2 before the learned Sessions Judge under the provisions of Section 439 (2) of the Cr.P.C. This application stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievance before the learned Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)