IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.18864 of 2010 SANJAY SINGH Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4/ 09.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner along with co-accused Naresh Rai, Ajay Singh and Jitendra Rai came to complainant/informant’s house while he was sleeping in night allegedly this petitioner blew Dab on his neck which cut his face including some teeth. He was taken to Referral Hospital, Sadar Hospital, thereafter P.M.C.H. Petitioner’s involvement is doubted on the ground that land dispute was there in between the parties. Complaint Petition was filed after 45 days of the incident and in the same night, another incident had also taken place in the village in which one Malik Prasad was injured made fardbeyan to the Police in P.M.C.H. mentioning therein that in continuation of injuring him, accused of that case, Manoj Tiwari and Janardhan Tiwari would have come to this complainant/informant and had injured him. F.I.R. of Malik Prasad is sufficient enough to show that this petitioner was admitted to P.M.C.H. and was not in a position to speak. Enmity cuts both way. The false 2 implication is possible but not exonerating the real culprit. Malik Prasad has shown the probability about commitment of the offence by Manoj Tiwari and Janardhan Tiwari, accused of his case but complainant/informant is victim of the case. Only delay in filing the case may never entitle petitioner for anticipatory bail, while allegation is specific corroborated by witnesses in the case diary. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected. Shail ( Mandhata Singh, J.)