IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39614 of 2008 AUN MD.ADIL @ AAN MD.ADIL Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 8/ 5/10/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. For reason of the statement made in paragraph-5 of the affidavit filed on behalf of the complainant, supported by the certificate of marriage issued by the competent statutory authority demonstrating that the petitioner remarried during the period, when he was contending before this Court to be desirous for revival of matrimonial relationship, based on his own conduct this Court is not satisfied that he is entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail. The application is rejected. Any application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner shall be considered by the court below on its own merits and keeping on mind the guidelines of this Court for grant of bail in matrimonial matters and that considerations for regular bail and anticipatory bail are entirely different and rejection of the latter cannot prejudice the former. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)