IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47786 of 2008 MAHIPLAL PANDIT Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2. 12.12.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a Police case under Sections 302/34 of the Penal Code. The submission is that there is no eye-witness to the crime. Three persons have been named on suspicion. The petitioner is not one of them. The three named have been enlarged on regular bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 55850 of 2007, Cr. Misc. No. 32835 of 2007 and Cr. Misc. No. 33850 of 2007 apart from them two certain other co-accused whose name had transpired during investigation named the petitioner. The submission is that the petitioner is similarly situated in as much as there is no material against him recorded during investigation or reinvestigation when final form had been submitted earlier with regard to him. Be that as it may, the impugned order noticed antecedents of 14 cases against the petitioner, the fact not disputed to urge that he has been acquitted in some of them. This Court considers that a sufficient justification not to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The application is rejected to that extent. Any application for regular bail on his behalf shall 2 have to be considered in light of the aforesaid discussion and the grant of regular bail to co-accused by independent application of mind by the court below exercising its discretion in accordance with law. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)