IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28399 of 2008 TEJNARAYAN MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR - - - - 2. 17.7.2008 Heard. The petitioner figures as an accused in a case registered under Sections 307 of the Indian Penal Code and bears a general allegation along with others of assaulting the informant and his father which is not indicated clearly by the informant as to who assaulted him and his father with what weapons. The order of the learned Judge indicates as if some witnesses had specified in their statements that it was this petitioner who had assaulted the informant and the learned Judge further wrote in his order that one injury was found on the person of the injured. What was the injury and on whose person the same was found he did not mention because there were two injured, the informant and his father. Besides, there is no information that it was on account of this petitioner’s assault that any injury was caused to either of the two injured. This was 2 the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. As regards the defence the petitioner claims the place of occurrence the room as his, purchased by him in the year 2003 in which he was living after taking possession of the room. This appears the motive also as indicated in the case diary. Besides, the contention is that the petitioner was not sent up for trial and that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur, has summoned the petitioner on perusal of the case diary. It is contended that all accused have been granted bail by the court below itself. I find that this is sufficient for the court below that it shall consider the above facts specially the fact that the allegation is indefinite and that there is a plea of property dispute and that the petitioner was not sent up for trial and consider the regular prayer for bail without any prejudice for preferring the anticipatory bail application. The learned court below, i.e., The Chief Judicial Magistate, Samastipur shall also consider that other accused have been 3 granted bail by the court below itself. The application is accordingly disposed of. Let this order be communicated to the court below, i.e, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur, in Kalyanpur P.S.Case No.172 of 2006 through fax at the cost of the petitioner. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)