IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32831 of 2009 AMARNATH SINGH @ ANIL SINGH Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ----- 2/ 12.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. It appears that there is divergent direction of skill leading to only contradiction. Informant was not being accepted for non-fulfillment of demanded dowry amount. So, any assertion for having sexual relation with her that also by an influential relation is the reason for making such observation. Allegations of demand was being made for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- was paid also but rest amount could not be paid, for which she was not being accepted and at the same time, it is said that this petitioner either was alluring or putting pressure on her to have sexual relation with him and adding one thing more that husband was not able to have relation for her pregnancy. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in connection with Barauni (Refinery) P.S. Case No. 145 of 2009 arising out of Complaint Case No. 959 (c) of 2009, above named petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each 2 to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Begusarai subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)