IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32541 of 2010 SHIVJEE MUKHIYA & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02/ 28.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned P.P. for the State. It appears that when the informant and other officials had gone to distribute flood relief and were preparing list of the beneficiaries, petitioners and several persons snatched aforesaid list and assaulted the informant and his associates and also looted the fund of the relief. Admittedly, except sections 353, 307 and 379 IPC all sections are bailable. Learned counsel for the petitioners drew my attention to the supervision note of SDPO that the offence under section 307 IPC has not been found true. So far as sections 353 and 379 IPC is concerned, the same are not specific against any of the petitioners. He further submitted that, as a matter of fact, when the informant and his associates started committing irregularity in distributing fund relief, a protest was made and after that informant lodged the instant case in exaggerated version. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners(Shivjee Mukhiya, Rajendra Mahto, Yogeshwar Mukhiya, Anant Kumar Yadav @ Anandi Yadav , Kito Yadav , Ram Pukar Yadav, Upendra Rai, Naresh Roy, Ram Prit Yadav and Shushil Yadav) in the event of arrest/ surrender within 30 days from the date of communication of the order 2 be released on bail in connection with Rosera P.S. Case no. 127 of 2007 on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000-/ each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the ACJM, Rosera subject to condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J))