( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3982 OF 2010 Suresh Madanlal Bharajwal & another APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. A.H. Kapadia, advocate holding for Mr. Swapnil S. Rathi, advocate for the applicants. Mrs. B.R. Khekale, APP for the respondent/State. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 5th October, 2010] PER COURT : 1. The application is for anticipatory bail. 2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Kapadia A.H., holding for Mr. S.S. Rathi. 3. It appears from the recitals of the F.I.R. that there is a property dispute between the informant and the applicants. The informant was delivered possession of the land in question by the Court as per the recitals of the ( 2 ) F.I.R. The first information report filed by injured - Shaikh Baba prima facie shows that on 17th September, 2010, he was returning home after purchasing a pan (betel-leaf) at Pan Stall. It is stated in the F.I.R. that the applicant No. 1 and his brother i.e. applicant No.2 came from his behind alongwith his cousins i.e. Shaikh Abdulla and others. They assaulted him by means of sticks on his right leg and head. He was injured. It is alleged that his right leg's bone was fractured. 4. The learned advocate for the applicants would submit that the applicants are falsely involved by the informant because of the property dispute. It is argued that the applicants are unconcerned with the alleged assault nor could have been identified because the place was surrounded by dark. It is contended that arrest of the applicants is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. 5. It prima facie appears that the informant was admitted in General Hospital, Jalna and was given medical treatment. The X-ray report is yet awaited. The allegation that the applicants are falsely involved due to the property dispute cannot be considered at this juncture, particularly when role of the applicants is stated in the F.I.R. and that ( 3 ) there is medical evidence to corroborate the averments in the F.I.R. The application is meritless and, therefore, is dismissed. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln3982-10