IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.28385 of 2011 1.Md. Hasib, Son of Ajim. 2.Md. Sanu Alam @ Mr. Sonu, Son of Md. Sadrul. 3.Md. Tofik, Son of Md. Rustam (withdraw vide earlier order). 4.Md. Daud, Son of Md. Ajim. 5.Shekh Sadrul @ Md. Sadrul, Son of Md. Ajim (withdraw vide earlier order). 6.Mosim @ Md. Mosim, Son of Md. Ajim. 7.Md. Anish, Son of Sekh Rustam. 8.Md. Kudus, Son of Md. Jainuddin. 9.Kabir @ Md. Kabir, Son of Musahru. 10.Jarik @ Md. Janif, Son of SK. Mushru. 11.Md. Raju, Son of Md. Rustam. 12.Md. Mannan, Son of SK. Sahabuddin. 13.Istaque @ Md. Istiyak, Son of Md. Buchi Mian. 14.Md. Kudus, Son of Shekh Mushahru . 15.Md. Tosif @ Tosim, Son of Hasib. 16.Md. Rajib, Son of Md. Sadrul. 17.Md. Firdos, Son of Hasib. All are residents of village Dhokaba, P.S. Dhamdaha, District Purnea. -------Petitioners Versus The State Of Bihar -----Opposite Party ----------------- 04/- 21/11/2011 Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, stating that father’s name of petitioner no. 14, namely, Md. Kudus is Shekh Mushahru, whereas, inadvertently in the application, it is typed as Jainuddin. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, who is armed with carbon/xerox copy of the case diary up to paragraph – 137 dated 12.03.2011. Out of total seventeen petitioners, prayer as with regard to petitioner nos. 3 & 5, namely, Md. Tofik & Shekh Sadrul @ Md. Sadrul has already been withdrawn vide earlier order dated 18/11/2011. The petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 427, 435, 323, 307, 153(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(X) of the S.C./S.T. Act. Names of remaining petitioners emerged during investigation, though petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13, 15, 16 & 17 are named accused persons in this case. Submission is that in a simple dispute between the parties getting institution of case and counter case and petitioners carry general and omnibus allegations. Moreover, dispute has also been resolved and accordingly, petitions for compromise have been filed. Further, the case is squarely covered under a decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in a case of “Jorgia Pentiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in 2009 (1) BCCR 153 (SC)”. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within four weeks, let the above named petitioners i.e. petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 111 of 2010, subject to condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with additional condition to remain physically present before the court below till disposal of the case and in case of failure on two consecutive dates without giving any reasonable explanation, the liberty granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. Praveen/- ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)