IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44800 of 2009 1. KANTI DEVI 2. BECHAN BAITHA ----------------- PETITIONERS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 24.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the complainant and State. Petitioners are at inimical terms with the complainant which is clear from a case filed on behalf of petitioner no.1 for offence under sections 341, 323 and 504 IPC and 3(i)(x) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, though final form is submitted in the case. The allegation is about non-distribution of grain to effected persons of the quantity which was allotted to them and it is submitted on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioners that of three witnesses, enquiry witness no.1 is stating about receiving of quantity allotted to him, witness no.2 also stating about receiving of quantity allotted to him but that was not provided to his married son. Witness no.3 only to state that he received lesser quantity. Complainant is ex-Mukhiya also. So circumstances in which petitioners are alleged do not justify refusal of anticipatory bail to petitioners. 2 Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the date of communication of this order, the above named petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pupri at Sitamarhi in C-1/142/09, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. AI ( Mandhata Singh, J.)