ORDER

1. Heard all the parties concerned.

2. Leave granted.

3. The complainant, aggrieved by the impugned order of the High Court dated 5th May, 2010, granting anticipatory bail to the Respondent Nos. 2 to 8 (accused Nos. 1 to 7), has filed the above appeal.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant by drawing our attention to the relevant materials, namely, the complaint, the statement of the complainant and four witnesses, as well as the relevant provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short 'the SC/ST Act'), submitted that the High Court is not justified in granting anticipatory bail, particularly, in the light of the factual conclusion arrived at by the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, Bihar on 28th November, 2008.

5. The learned Counsel appearing for the State supported the claim of the Appellant.

6. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents/accused submitted that from the day, namely, 26th February, 2010, when the High Court granted anticipatory bail to these persons, no untoward incident occurred and cooperated with Investigating Officer. He also brought to our notice the earlier order of the High Court dated 26thFebrua