IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18005 of 2011 MUKHDEO YADAV & ORS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 13.6.2011 Heard. The Sessions Judge’s order of rejection indicates that he was also issuing directions to the petitioners as also to the court below him that the petitioners should seek regular bail and that the court below shall consider it. It may not be in clear terms but the implication of the observation was like that. This Court appreciates the direction of the learned Sessions Judge, Gaya, to the petitioners who are accused in Barachatti P.S.Case No. 8 of 2011. In view of the fact that F.I.R. was registered after nine months of the incident and still it was not clear and specific as to who were firing shots and doing overt act. If it may not be a case being handled by a Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate then there could be none. Let all the nine petitioners, namely, Mukhdeo Yadav, Matan Yadav, Butali Yadav, Bhunal Manjhi, Sheo Balak Manjhi, Kara Manjhi, Hirday Manjhi, Suresh Yadav and Dhanu Yadav surrender before the court below and prayer for regular bail which shall be considered without being prejudiced by the fact that the petitioners have preferred a petition under Section 438 of the Cr. P.C. before this Court. The court below shall keep in its mind the finding recorded above that the allegations are 2 general and non-specific and the submission was that the situation was compounded more by absence of any injury on the injured. This petition stands disposed of with the above observation. Let this order be communicated to the S.D.J.M.,Sherghatti(Gaya) in the above noted case through fax at the cost of the petitioners. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)