IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11511 of 2010 AMIT KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR -------- 2 6-5-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the complainant. On behalf of the petitioner it has been submitted that there was no cruelty with the complainant and a Matrimonial Suit for divorce was filed by the petitioner in July, 2007 on the ground that complainant is insane much before filing of the complaint case in April 2009. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that complainant was reconciled to wait for decision in the Matrimonial Suit although she had been turned out for dowry but she had to file this criminal case giving all the facts because during the pendency of the Matrimonial Suit the petitioner married again with a lady whose parentage and details have been given in paragraph 9 of the complaint petition. Although offence u/s 494 is bailable but considering the entire facts and circumstances, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. This order shall not prejudice the case of petitioner for regular bail if he surrenders and prays for same on all the grounds available to him. BKS/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)