IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.35546 of 2008 1. RAMESHWAR RAM son of Bishuni Ram 2. Sarwan Ram son of Ram Nath Ram 3. Dasrath Ram son of Late Ramdhari Ram 4. Ramashish Ram son of Mathura Ram 5. Ramchandra Ram son of Late Jagarnath Ram 6. Keshwar Ram son of Vishwanath Ram 7. Lalan Chaudhary son of Late Thakur Chaudhary 8. Sikander Ram son of Khedu Ram 9. Inderjit Ram @ Indrajit Ram son of Nathuni Ram 10.Budhari Ram son of Late Jagdeo Ram, all resident of village- Ekderawa, P.S.- Matiaria, District- East Champaran 11.Kanhaiya Yadav son of Late Nanhu Yadav 12.Rajesh Manjhi son of Bhim Manjhi, both resident of village- Labanishkhar, P.S.- Ramnagar, District- West Champaran 13.Harinder Ram @ Harindra Ram son of Mangani Ram 14.Bharat Ram son of Late Batai Ram, both resident of village- Belaura, P.S.- Ramnagar, District- West Champaran. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 25.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.P.S. Singh, Addl. P.P. appearing for the State. The offence alleged is under sections 147, 148, 149, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. Allegation is to the effect that all the petitioners along with other co-accused persons assembled and started firing from their rifle, however on resistance of the villagers untoward incidence could be avoided. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the allegations are omnibus in nature and no one sustained any injury in the alleged firing. It is further submitted that these is no specific allegation of firing against - 2 - these petitioners of making firing. It is further contended that although the case was registered in the year 2005, however they are having apprehension of their arrest as some of the accused persons were arrested in the year 2008. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during investigation material has come to the effect that these petitioners had also made firing along with other co-accused persons. He further submits that the present case is of the year 2005 and the present application has been filed now which indicates that the petitioners have no apprehension of their arrest. In the facts and circumstances of the case and the respective submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected. However, if the petitioners surrenders in the Court below and makes an application for regular bail, the same shall be considered on its on merit in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the present order. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)