IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3897 of 2010 WAKIL SHARMA & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 18.5.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case under sections 304(B), 201/34 of the Penal Code. Petitioner no.1 is the father-in-law and petitioner nos.2 to 4 happens to be the son of petitioner no.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no case under section 304(B) of the Penal Code is made out. As per the F.I.R., the occurrence took place about 9 years after the marriage of the deceased. He further submits that there is no eye witness to the occurrence and the husband of the deceased has not been made an accused in the instant case. Learned State counsel submits that the husband of the deceased stays at Mumbai and there was some disputes between petitioner no.1 and the deceased father towards non-payment of balance amount of Rs.10,000/- which was assured at the time of marriage. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner nos.2 to 4 namely Anil Sharma, Sunil Sharma and Pankaj Sharma are directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest/surrender within six weeks from today, in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case 2 KHAN No.203/09, G.R.No.1672/09 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria. So far as petitioner no.1 Wakil Sharma is concerned, learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw his application for anticipatory bail. The prayer is allowed and this application, so far as petitioner no.1 Wakil Sharma is concerned, is dismissed as withdrawn. However, if petitioner no.1 Wakil Sharma surrenders and prays for regular bail, the same would be considered on its own merits without any prejudice. (S.P.Singh,J)