IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27097 of 2010 1. INDU DEVI, WIFE OF BIPIN PANDEY, 2. SUNILA DEVI, WIFE OF UMESH PANDEY, 3. INDRESH PANDEY, S/O LATE ARJUN PANDEY, 4. BIPIN PANDEY, S/O RAM CHANDAR PANDEY, 5. KUNDAN KUMAR, S/O INDRESH PANDEY, 6. RANJEET PANDEY, S/O LATE RAM ADKHIKARI PANDEY, 7. KANHAI PANDEY, S/O BIPIN PANDEY, --PETITIONERS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --OPP.PARTY 2 29.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the seven petitioners, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri Hari Kishore Thakur for the informant. It is submitted that petitioner no.4, Bipin Pandey, has been apprehended. Hence, the application on behalf of petitioner no.4 is dismissed as withdrawn as having become infructuous. The petitioners are named accused in this case besides others carry allegation of participation in occurrence of assault with prosecution side with respect to petty dispute. Injury sustained appears simple in nature to majority of the injured. However, as regard to husband of the informant, one of the injury sustained by him reportedly grievous in nature but none of the petitioners carries specific allegation of 2 inflicting such injuries. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, are directed to be enlarged on bail on each of them furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in Sakar P.S. Case no. 110 of 2010, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with additional condition that the petitioners no.3, 5, 6 and 7 shall remain present before the court below for two years or till disposal of the case, whichever is earlier. If the petitioners no. 3, 5, 6 and 7 fail to remain present on two consecutive dates without any reasonable explanation the privilege granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.) AAhmad