IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.37583 of 2008 1.RAMCHANDRA ROY son of Late Narayan Roy 2.AJAY ROY @ AJAY KUMAR ROY son of Shri Ramchandra Roy 3.KUNDAN ROY, son of Jagdeo Roy, All resident of Gulabagh, P.S. Sadar, District Purnea ------Petitioners Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 3.12.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.139 of 2007 for the alleged offences registered under sections 147, 420, 354 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the present complaint has been filed for ulterior purpose since petitioner no.1 is the tenant of the complainant and he wants that he should vacate the premises. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the petitioner no.1 was to execute the sale deed in respect of the piece of property in favour of the complainant. However, since full payment was not made, no sale deed was executed in favour of the complainant. The learned APP appearing for the State submits that on perusal of the complaint as well as the examination of the complainant on solemn affirmation, it appears that petitioner no.1 had executed the agreement for sale in respect of his piece of property and even after receiving the money, the same was not being executed, on 2 which the complainant used to insist and then petitioner no.1 and other accused persons entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted the wife of the complainant. Specific allegation has been made against petitioner no.1. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioners no.2 and 3 above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Complaint Case No.139 of 2007, within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Purnea, in connection with the aforesaid case, on the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) of section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. So far as the prayer for bail made on behalf of petitioner no.1 Ramchandra Roy is concerned, considering the nature of allegations, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him. This application, as against petitioner no.1 Ramchandra Roy, is, thus, dismissed. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)