IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12285 of 2010 1. BATIYA DEVI, wife of Saryug Yadav 2. Saryug Yadav, son of Late Bhanu Yadav Both are resident of village-Bholui Naya Tola, P.S.-Chanan,District-Lakhisarai. .. .. .. Petitioners Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR.. .. Opp.Party With Cr.Misc.No.16939 of 2010 Chhotu Yadav,son of Saryug Yadav,resident of village-Bhalui Naya Tola, P.S.-Chanan, District-Lakhisarai.. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Rasho Yadav @ Suresh Yadav,s/o Late Mahavir Yadav, Vill+P.O.-Urain, P.S.- Kajara,Distt.-Lakhisarai. 3. Sunita Kumari,D/o Rasho Yadav @ Suresh yadav, r/o Vill.+P.O.-Urain,P.S.-Kajara, Distt.-Lakhisarai.. Opp.Parties ----------- For the Petitioners :Mr.Ramesh Singh,Advocate For the State :Mr.Bishweshwar Ram,Addl.P.P. ----------- 02/ 06-05-2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for the offence under Section 498A and some other offences under Indian Penal Code as also under Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioners of Cr.Misc.No.12285 of 2010 are parents-in-law of the alleged victim-Sunita Kumari, daughter of the complainant, whereas petitioner of Cr.Misc.No.16939 of 2010 is the husband of the victim. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is general and omnibus allegation of demand of dowry and torture against all the accused persons including the 2 petitioners and some other co-accused persons, who are in-laws of the alleged victim and have been granted anticipatory bail by a Bench of this court vide order dated 12-03-2010 passed in Cr.Misc.No.8801 of 2010. Be that as it may, in view of the fact that petitioners Batiya Devi and Saryug Yadav are mother-in-law and father-in- law respectively of the victim and allegation against them appears to be in the nature of general and omnibus, therefore, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from today in Complaint Case No.196C/2008, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M., Lakhisarai, subject to the conditions as laid down under sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, so far petitioner-Chhotu Yadav is concerned, he is the husband of the victim lady and he was supposed to be responsible for well being of his wife, but there is specific allegation of demand of dowry and torture against him. In that view of the matter, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. He must surrender in connection with Complaint Case No.196C/2008 within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. If such a petition is filed, the same shall be considered and disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner-Chhotu 3 Yadav to enter into some sort of agreement with his wife either for restoration of matrimonial relationship or for one time settlement of entire dispute, and if such agreement is arrived at, then in that case the attendance of the wife may be secured and in the light of agreement so arrived at, the court below may consider his regular bail favourably. AH/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)