IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8635 of 2009 1. MD. HADISH MIYAN @ MD. HADISH MIYAN @ MD. HADISH 2. MD SAMSER MIYAN @ MD SAMSAR MINYA @ SHAMSHER 3. MD ALISAR MIYAN @ MD ALISAR MINYA @ MD ALISAR 4. MD NOORSAID 5. MD JAHOOR MIYAN @ MD JAHOOR MINYA @ MD JAHOOR 6. MD AFJAL MIYAN ALIAS ABJAL @ MD AFJAL MINYA @ AFJAL ALI ………… petitioners Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 9.4.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the incident, if any was taken place in the month of January, 2006 but this case was lodged only in the month of August near about after seven or eight months. It was so done only due to filing of a case on behalf of petitioner no.1 against father and others of the complainant. In that case also petitioners were apprehending their implication in a false case that is done also. But as submitted applicability of the offence under the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has already been scrutinized at the stage of cognizance as earlier the cognizance was not taken for this offence. Revision was filed then only there was direction for further inquiry and this offence was made applicable. Seriousness of the allegation can be doubted, no doubt where the offence is reported after seven months liberal view also can be taken on that point, for that maintainability of the bail petition should be justified. I find no such justification. Only at the stage an observation which can be given is that the petitioners are - 2 - entitled for liberal view but by the trial court or where the case is pending and prayer for regular bail is filed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer of anticipatory bail is rejected. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI