IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.52757 of 2008 1. AMARNATH SINGH 2. RIPU KUMAR ---------------- Petitioners Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 19.5.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for withdrawal of application for anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioner no.1, as he died during the pendency of this application. The prayer is allowed and this application is dismissed as infructuous. Petitioner has been alleged for coming to complainant’s hut abusing him, set her hut on fire and snatching wrist watch, according to learned counsel, is super-addition only to make the offence serious pressurizing to give up their claim over the land which the complainant was attempting to grab. Keeping in view the nature of the hut, section 435 IPC is added in the case. Time of occurrence has been shown 8.30 PM without referring presence of any one there. So no case under section 3(i)(x) of - 2 - S.C./S.T.(Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out but petitioner no.2 is apprehending his arrest which never can be justified. I agree with the submission. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, it is directed that in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today, petitioner no.2 shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Complaint Case No. 2428 of 2006, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI