IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38139 of 2008 1.HARIHAR PATEL @ HARIHAR PD.PATEL, son of late Bujhawan Patel 2.VINAY KUMAR PATEL, son of Hairhar Prasad Patel 3.RENU DEVI, wife of Vinay Kumar Patel 4.SHIV SHANKAR PATEL, son of Harihar Pd. Patel 1 to 4 are resident of Village Kamalpur, P.S. Bidupur, District Vaishali 5.RAJESH KUMAR, son of Nagendra Mahto, resident of Village Sahatha, P.S. Lalganj, Distt. Vaishali -----Petitioners Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 28.11.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.584/07 (Trial No.2663/08) for the offences under sections 147, 323, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of the Dayan Act. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, earlier the complainant had also filed a complaint against the petitioners under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, as contained in Annexure 2. Learned counsel further submitted that the nature of the allegation is not such 2 which the accused persons could have done. The learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in view of the nature of allegations and the manner of the alleged crime, the petitioners are not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations made in the complaint, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)