IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1395 of 2011 MAULI YADAV, SON OF BACHHOO YADAV. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR with Cr.Misc. No.3297 of 2011 MANTU YADAV, SON OF SAVITA YADAV. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 15.04.2011 Both the above stated petitions arise out of Harnaut (Chero) P.S. Case No. 131 of 2010 registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and accordingly, both the said petitions are being disposed of by this common order. Petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 1395 of 2011 is said to be main assailant whereas petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 3297 of 2011 used to give threat to the nephew of the informant. Learned counsel appearing in Cr. Misc. No. 1395 of 2011 submits that except informant as well as his cousin brother none of the witnesses has claimed to have seen the petitioners committing the alleged crime. It is also contended by him that the reason of false implication is land dispute which is admitted in the First Information Report itself. Learned counsel appearing in Cr. Misc. No. 3297 of 2011 submits that no specific overt act has been attributed against the petitioner. Considering the above stated submissions as well as facts and circumstances of the case, I do not feel it proper to extend the privilege of bail to petitioner Murli Yadav of Cr. 2 Misc. No. 1395 of 2011. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected. So far as, prayer for bail of petitioner Mantu Yadav of Cr. Misc. No. 3295 of 2011 is concerned, considering this aspect of the matter that no specific overt act has been attributed against him, the above named, petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Harnaut(chero) P.S. Case No. 131 of 2010. Devendra/ ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)