IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26791 of 2009 1. RAM CHANDRA SINGH 2. BIRENDRA KUMAR 3. HARESH KUMAR 4. RAJEEV RANJAN KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 17.09.2009 Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail in a case instituted under sections ¾ of SC/ST Act. Learned counsel while referring to the FIR, submits that the prosecution side in fact sought for restraining the petitioners from forcible possession of a piece of land (rasta). From perusal of the FIR, it appears basically a dispute between the parties over possession of a particular stretch of land had arisen. It is next contended that the allegation constituting offence(s) under section 3 (X) of the SC/ST Act has been purposely interluded in order to forbid the petitioners from seeking protection under section 438 Cr.P.C. With reference to certain case law, it has been argued that even going by the allegation, the offence under section 3(X) of the SC/ST Act shall not constitute as it is not alleged that he was seen abusing in the name of caste in presence of people around. This Court, for the present, refrains from expressing any view on the said submissions of the counsel as - 2 - the same may prejudice the case of either the petitioner(s) or the informant. However, the submissions which have been advanced by the petitioners seem to have some substance. Let the petitioners surrender in the court below and apply for regular bail which shall be considered on its own merit having regard to the materials on record uninfluenced by the present order. This Court expects that the application, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day. With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )