IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11952 of 2009 NITAILAL RAI @ ASHOK KUMAR ROY Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ------ 2/ 21.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that differences were there in between the parties for not selling ornaments up to the standard mark. According to the learned counsel reality is that the complainant approached the petitioner’s shop to exchange ornaments. She was asked its making charge then only there were some differences between them and this case was lodged without any allegation of under Section 379 of I.P.C. However, the matter was reconciled and settled and the parties have filed compromise petition. So, petitioner’s refusal for anticipatory bail at the moment is not justified. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 119 of 2009 arising out of Complaint Case no. C-28 of 2009, above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Sitamarhi subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. shail (Mandhata Singh,J.)