IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29180 of 2010 DR.RAM BHAJAN PANDIT @ MANOJ KUMAR & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 11.08.2010 Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Section 304/34 of the I.P.C. It is alleged that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 who claim to be the doctor and compounder respectively had treated the daughter-in-law of the informant who subsequently died. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the village petitioner No. 1 used to practice and treat the patient though during the treatment the death has taken place but no motive has been alleged against the petitioners. It is further submitted that informant has retracted from her initial version and has filed an application to that effect as contained in Annexure-2. Considering the aforesaid facts, though I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, but on the facts and circumstances, I think that it is a good case for grant of regular bail. The application for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is rejected. Learned Court below may consider the regular bail application of the petitioners on the basis of 2 observation made above, pass appropriate order after verification of the compromise petition and may dispose of the matter preferably on the same day. Let the order of this Court be communicated through FAX to the Court below at the cost of the petitioner. Shageer ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)