IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44587 of 2010 1. BINDESHWARI MAHTO 2. PRABHU MAHTO 3. BALKESHWAR MAHTO 4. SURENDRA MAHTO Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02. 19.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the state. Submission of the learned counsel for petitioners is that no question arises about humiliation to the informant for his belonging to member of one of the Scheduled Castes. According to the learned counsel, land dispute was there in between the parties. Earlier case was filed by petitioner no.1 for the offence under section 341,323,379,504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, to counter the same, this allegation is made in which everything happened inside the house without specifying as who among petitioners abused the informant or any of his family members. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, the above named petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Chanpatia P. S. Case No.269 of 2010, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr. P. C. Vikash ( Mandhata Singh, J.)