IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.21902 of 2011 1. Gajan Yadav, son of late Mothi Yadav of village – Dhani Chak, P.S. – Masaurhi, District – Patna. 2. Sunil Yadav, son of Nanhu Yadav of village Jamalpur, P.S. – Paraiya, District – Patna. -------- Petitioners. Versus The State Of Bihar -----Opposite Party ---------- For the petitioners : Mr. Lallu Prasad, Adv. For the State : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ****** 02. 01.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 454/2009 for the offences under Sections 147/148/149/341/323/ 307/384 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of S.D.J.M., Masaurhi, Patna. Both the petitioners are named accused in this case. Petitioner no. 1 Gajan Yadav, carries specific allegation of assaulting the informant by Farsa on his head and other portions of the body, whereas against petitioner no.2 Sunil Yadav, there is omnibus and general allegations attracted. There is counter version also by way of Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 453/2009, wherein one person has already lost his life in alleged occurrence relating with land dispute. In view of the allegation levelled against 2 petitioner no. 1 namely, Gajan Yadav, this court is not inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. Hence, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no.1 namely, Gajan Yadav is hereby rejected. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks, let the petitioner no.2 namely, Sunil Yadav, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of sum of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Masaurhi, Patna, in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 454/2009, subject to condition under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and additional condition to attend the court regularly at least for two years or till disposal of the case, whichever is earlier and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates, without any reasonable explanation, the privilege granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. Rajeev/ ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)