- (1.) By this application petitioners have prayed for anticipatory bail as they apprehend that they may be arrested by the police in connection with Chopra P. S. Case No. 87/2000.
(2.) However, a serious objection has been raised by learned Additional P. P. against maintainability of the present petition on the ground that exactly similar application being C. R. M. No. 1720/200U preferred by the petitioners on an earlier possession seeking exactly same relief was rejected by another Division Bench of this Court by an order passed on 18.5 2000.
(3.) According to Mr. S. S. Roy, learned Counsel for the petitioners, this application is maintainable as because new circumstances have developed since earlier application for anticipatory bail was turned down by this Court. On the other hand contention of learned Additional P.P. is that in no case such application is maintainable second time after similar application seeking exactly same relief was turned down by this Court. His further contention is that development of new circumstances since rejection of the earlier application cannot lend maintainability to the present application buttress is aforesaid contention learned Additional P. P. cited a decision of this Court in Ekkari Ghosh @ Jitendra v. Suite of West Bengal, 1994(2) CHN 123. He also cited another decision of this Court in Kalidas Mitra v. State, 1989 (3) Crimes 652. On the other hand Mr. Roy cited large number of decisions in support of his contentions. It is true that this Court gave conflicting decisions on the aforesaid question of law.;