IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1947 of 2010 RAM PRIT SAH, son of late Saryug Sah, resident of village Narma, P.S. Hathauri, District Muzaffarpur Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 23.2.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. While the petitioner, an accused for offence under sections 406, 504, 380, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, would press for bail on the ground that the complaint in question was filed by way of vengeance on account of two cases already filed by the petitioner being Complaint Case No. 570/1994 and Hathauri P.S.Case No. 68/2004, he will have no answer to the fact that in the present case cognizance was taken on 11.1.2005 and yet it took him a period of three years to move for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge and another two years to get the same adjudicated after the first application was dismissed for default. In the opinion of this Court a person who would be easily moving around for a period over five years has no real apprehension of his being arrested and thus would definitely not be entitled for grant 2 of anticipatory bail. That being so, while this Court would reject the prayer for anticipatory bail, it is made clear that if the petitioner would surrender in the court below, his prayer for regular bail would be considered on its own merit, without being prejudiced by this order of rejection of the prayer for anticipatory bail and also by taking into account the similarity of the cases of the other co-accused who have been granted regular bail. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/