IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12438 of 2010 SUBODH SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, No.3, Advocate For the State : Mr. Nityanand , A.P.P. ----------- 2 10.5.2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for offences under section 427, 504 and some other minor and bailable offences under the Indian Penal Code as also under section 3 (1) (iv)(x) of the SC & ST (P.O.A. ) Act, the petitioner is alleged to have cultivated the land, detailed in the FIR vide Annexure-1, which is allegedly belonging to the informant and because of the aforesaid cultivation, the informant claims to have sustained a loss of Rs. 35,000/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that dispute between the petitioner and the informant is in fact civil in nature and both sides claim the land in question to be their own and a proceeding under section 145 Cr.P.C. is going on between the parties. Be that as it may, in view of the fact that there is allegation against the petitioner of cultivation of land belonging to the informant and in view of the ratio decidendi laid down by this Court in the case of Sajjo and others V State of Bihar, reported in 2010 (2) BLJ, 181, this court cannot make an depth inquiry about the defence made by the petitioner regarding land in question, and in fact only a prima facie case is required to be seen. From plain perusal of the FIR vide Annexure-1 a case under section 3(1) (iv) (x) of SC & ST (P.O.A) Act is made out against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the present application under section - 2 - 438 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable and it is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner must surrender in connection with Begusarai Harizan P.S. Case No. 214 of 2009 in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and, if so advised, seek regular bail which shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. ) M.Rahman