IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14883 of 2010 1. SHAMBHU PRASAD MISHRA 2. Sheela Mishra 3. Santosh Kuamr Versus The STATE OF BIHAR ------ 2/ 13.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. It appears that petitioners are victim of non-application of mind by the learned Sessions Judge otherwise there is vague allegation about demand and torture at petitioners’ hand, who are father-in-law, mother-in-law and younger brother-in-law of the victim. There is specific allegation against complainant’s husband, that also may be matrimonial differences only but in any case, refusal of petitioners’ anticipatory bail cannot be justified. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of the petitioners 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 Complaint Case No. 58 of 2009, above named petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Sampat Kumar, J.M., Ist Class, Dalsingsarai, Samastipur subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr. P.C. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)