IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42391 of 2010 BABLU KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 01.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Differences are said for transaction of money which petitioner was intending to return, otherwise to execute sale deed. Demand of ransom, snatching of wrist watch and cash alongwith abuse in name of informant’s caste may be disbelieved but only in regular side as one of its allegations is regarding abuse in name of informant’s caste constitutes offence under Section 3 (X) of S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, petitioner is at liberty to surrender in the court below and pray for regular bail which shall be decided on its own merit on the same day considering observations made above. Safik ( Mandhata Singh, J. )