IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18183 of 2011 PRAMOD NARAYAN PODDAR @ Pramod Poddar Son of Late Rejeshwar Poddar, R/0 Gauri Shankar Complex, Lohia Nagar, P.S. Kankerbagh, Dist- Patna. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ------------------ 2. 31.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 (x) 2 of the S.C. and S.T. Act. Petitioner has remained in jail custody since 10.4.2011. The F.I.R. has been instituted at Hawai Adda police station stating that on 5.4.2011 police got information that there were firing at the place of occurrence. When the police arrived at the spot two groups of people were brickbatting. There is statement from several persons who belong to the Musahar community that the petitioner, is sons and some other persons were firing at the mob. During the course of investigation it has transpired that the son of the petitioner had entered into an agreement to build a multi storeyed building on the land which is subject matter of the dispute. Amit Poddar arrived to start construction work, while doing so the 2 Musahar of the locality objected and raised some trouble which resulted in this incident. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as far as this petitioner is concerned, he is separate in his business from his son. It is submitted that he has been roped merely because he is father of Amit Poddar. It is further submitted that right of property is a valuable right given to a person, whether they belong to Musahari community or to upper caste community and it cannot be interfered with in the manner in which it was done. It is also submitted that on the date of occurrence that is on 5.4.2011 the petitioner had gone to the registry office to present the sale deeds. There are several documents bearing the signature of the petitioner which have been presented on 5.4.2011. This Court, however, finds that the petitioner has remained in custody since for a very short period i.e. from 10.4.2011 and therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for the present. Hence, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected. Anand Kr. ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)