IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2837 of 2010 1. Sudhir Mahto, son of Jamun Mahto 2. Binay Kumar @ Tippu, son of Sudhir Mahto 3. Panakj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Sahni, son of Amir Sahni 4. Amit Kumar, son of Pramod Mahto Versus The State of Bihar 2. 07.04.2010 It is stated by Mr. Ambika Bhagat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that during the pendency of this application, petitioner no.2 Binay Kumar @ Tippu has been arrested and therefore, his petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of petitioner no.2 is dismissed as infructuous. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Surajgarha (Manikpur) P.S.Case No.344/09 dated 1.11.2009 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 307 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that there are a case and counter case vide Annexures 1 and 2 respectively from both sides. He further submits that the entire occurrence has taken place because of a bonafide land dispute 2 between the parties and both sides have sustained injuries on their persons, but all the injuries have been found to be simple in nature. Learned counsels appearing for the informant and the State have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail, but they have not disputed the factum of land dispute between the parties. Be that as it may, in the circumstances, let the petitioner nos.1, 3 & 4, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within four weeks from today be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M, Lakhisarai in connection with Surajgarha (Manikpur) P.S.Case No.344/09 subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C. V.K. Pandey (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)