IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20934 of 2009 1. MAHENDRA MAHTO, son of Bhura Mahto 2. Hiralal Mahto, son of late Magru Mahto Both resident of village-Mapha, P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya-------Petitioners. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 24.7.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there was previous enmity prevailing in between the parties. Earlier case was filed by the wife of co-accused Pradeep in which petitioner no.1’s wife was a witness. Otherwise, loot is alleged also but no recovery was made and complainant’s re-statement could not be possible due to his remanding in jail custody in a case under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the petitioner, this much is relevant only to show that from a veteran criminal how it is possible to make any ransom and even then petitioners are apprehending their arrest which in my view also not justified. In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. 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 the C.J.M., Gaya, in connection with Atri P.S. case no.73 of 2008 , subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Sudip ( Mandhata Singh, J )