IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11196 of 2010 1. HIRALAL CHAUDHARY,son of Ramdhani Chaudhary 2. Krishnanand Chaudhary,son of Dina Chaudhary 3. Dina Chaudhary @ Dinanath Chaudhary,son of Biadyanath Chaudhary 4. Akhilesh Chaudhary,son of Laljee Chaudhary 5. Ramanuj Chaudhary,son of Prahalad Chaudhary 6. Tuntun Chaudhary,son of Ramanuj Chaudhary 7. Pramod Chaudhary,son of Lalan Chaudhary 8. Bitoo Chaudhary,son of Akhilesh Chaudhary 9. Sarda Devi, wife of Hiralal Chaudhary 10. Munni Devi,wife of Hiralal Chaudhary All residents of village-Pakadi,P.S.- Chanturwa, District-West Champaran.. .. …………………………………………..Petitioners Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR.. ..Opp.Party ----------- For the Petitioners :Mr. Suraj Narain Pd.Sinha, Senior Advocate For the Informant :Mr. Milind Kr.Mishra, Advocate For the State :Mr. R.B.Roy,`Raman’, Addl.P.P. ------------- 02/ 27-04-2010 Heard the parties. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Chautarwa P.S.Case No.23 of 2010 dated 24-01-2010, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 447, 448, 379, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There are case and counter case vide Annexures-1 and 2 from both the sides with respect to the same occurrence and, in fact, the present case filed vide Annexure-1 is a counter blast of a case lodged by petitioner no.1 earlier vide Annexure-2. The occurrence is said to have taken place on 18-01-2010 and for that the petitioner lodged the aforesaid case vide Annexure-2 and after 2 about six days the present case was lodged on 24-01-2010 and this creates grave doubt about the genuineness and bonafide about the entire prosecution allegation. It is submitted that there are injuries from both the sides. From the side of the petitioners, Sarda Devi had sustained grievous injury on her person and from the side of prosecution also some persons had sustained injuries on their person but the allegation of assault made against the petitioner- Dina Chaudhary and petitioner-Akhilesh Chaudhary are not supported by the injury report. It is also highlighted that except offence under Section 379 of the Penal Code all other offences are bailable. Learned counsels for the informant and the State have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioners. Taking into consideration the facts that there are case and counter case from both the sides and there appears to be some bonafide land dispute between the parties, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from today in the above noted case, the above named petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagha, West Champaran, subject to the conditions as laid down under sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. AH/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)