IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11446 of 2009 1. RAJIV RANJAN SINGH 2. SHAMBHU SINGH 3. ARUN KUMAR SINGH 4. HIMANSHU KUMAR SINGH ALIAS HIMANSHU SINGH ---- Petitioners Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 23.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that though the petitioners have been alleged for making demand of loan from the complainant and on refusal taking away cash and ornaments from the house but the complainant is set up by block pramukh due to having enmity and grudge against the petitioners. A case is pending filed on behalf of petitioner no.1’s wife and petitioner no.2’s father against block pramukh. Petitioner nos. 1,3 and 4 are full brothers and because of making the allegation in the complaint petition there is no probability entering into this defence by the enquirying officer but annexures-4 and 5 are there to show that cases are there against block pramukh. So basing the allegation made in the complaint petition, petitioners’ arrest at the moment cannot be justified. I agree with the submission. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within one month from today in Complaint Case No. 2101 of 2007, Tr.No.2475 of 2008, the above named four petitioners shall be released on bail on - 2 - furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri R.N.Tripathi, Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI