IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32402 of 2010 JHABAR MAHTO & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 28.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned P.P. for the State. It would appear from the record that petitioners are accused in connection with Govindganj P.S. Case No. 59 of 2002 registered under Sections 304(B), 201 and 120(B)/34 of the I.P.C. The prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected up to this court much earlier in 2004 but in spite of that they did not surrender in the court below. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the father-in-law of the deceased has already been acquitted by the trial court after considering the statement of the informant who had stated that he had lodged the case on misinformation and misconception. Be that as it may, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioners. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail petition stands rejected with a direction to petitioners to surrender before the learned court below within thirty days from the date of communication of this order and if they do so and seek regular bail before learned C.J.M, Motihari, the regular bail application of the petitioners shall be disposed of by learned C.J.M, Motihari on the date of filing and after that if petitioners pray for regular bail before the learned Sessions Judge, the learned Sessions Judge shall pass order on the regular bail 2 application of the petitioners on its own merit without being prejudiced by rejection order of this Court, particularly, keeping in mind that some co-accused persons have already been acquitted and the informant has not supported the prosecution story. Shahid/Shahzad ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)