IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2275 of 2010 1. AFSANA, daughter of Abdul Rahman, wife of Md. Wasi @ Basir. 2. Afroji, wife of Kalam, daughter of Abdul Rahman. 3. Budhni Khatoon, wife of Abdul Rahman. 4. Md. Wasi, @ Basir, son of Md. Yunus (wrongly named in F.I.R. Abdul Rahman in place of Md. Yunus). All are resident of village Bath, P.S. Nanpur, District- Sitamarhi. ….. Petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 25.02.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the State as also counsel for the informant. The prayer for anticipatory bail of all the four petitioners for an offence under Section 302 and other allied sections of Indian Penal code is sought primarily on the ground that as a matter of fact it is a case of free fight between two sides in which though the lady members have also been named, but there is no specific overtact against them. On perusal of the FIR, it appears that there is no specific overtact against petitioners no. 1 to 3 and accordingly taking into account the case and counter case as also in absence of any allegation of specific overtact, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to all the three lady petitioners. That being so, the petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3 2 namely, Afsana, Afroji and Budhni Khatoon, in the event they would surrender within a period of four weeks from today, are directed to 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 S.D.J.M., Pupri, Sitamarhi in connection with Nanpur P. S. Case No. 105 of 2009, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. In view of the fact that there is an allegation of wielding of lathi by petitioner no. 4 which is said to have also resulted into injuries on the son of the informant, this Court would find his case distinguishable and accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of Md. Wasi @ Basir petitioner no. 4 is rejected. However, in the event the petitioner no. 4 would surrender and pray for regular bail, the court below would consider his such prayer for regular bail on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order of rejection of his prayer for anticipatory bail. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)