IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.36107 of 2009 1. SATYA NARAIN SAH S/O LATE BOUK SAH VILL.- HAJIAPUR, WARD NO. 26, P.S.- GOPALGANJ, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ; 2. UMESH SAH S/O SATYA NARAIN SAH VILL.- HAJIAPUR, WARD NO. 26, P.S.- GOPALGANJ, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ. 3. AMOD SAH S/O SATYA NARAIN SAH VILL.- HAJIAPUR, WARD NO. 26, P.S.- GOPALGANJ, DISTT.- GOPALGANJ......................................................................Petitioners. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR...........................................................................Opposite Party. ----------- 2. 22.12.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State. Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Sections 324,307, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There is case and counter-case arising out of land dispute. Petitioners have also filed a case after two days of the occurrence whereas the present case has been filed immediately after the occurrence. The allegation is that the petitioners are said to have inflicted injury on the informant on the various parts of the body of the informant including the Head. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that other accused persons in the counter-case have been granted bail by this Court, and as such, petitioners’ case should also be considered as their case stands on similar footing to the case of other accused persons who have been granted bail. Considering the allegation in the First Information Report, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 2 petitioners. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioners is rejected. However, if the petitioners surrender, the court below will consider the regular bail application after considering the injury report and keeping in view the fact that the case is arising out of land dispute and other accused persons have been granted bail and pass an appropriate order within a period of one week. U.K. (Sheema Ali Khan,J)