IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7951 of 2008 RAJAN KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 12.5.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in a case under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fardbeyan in the present case has been lodged by Choukidar and not by the in-laws. It is further submitted that the marriage itself had taken place 11 years back and the petitioner has an eight years old daughter and a seven years old son from the deceased. It is urged by learned counsel that it has come during the course of investigation also that there was altercation between the husband and wife in the previous night on the issue of cooking of excessive food and thereafter the deceased had committed suicide. Learned counsel for the petitioner however admits that in the supervision note the Superintendent of Police has found the allegations to be true so far as the present petitioner is concerned. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that witnesses have supported the case in the case diary and even the son and daughter of the petitioner have stated that on account of torture by the father their mother had committed suicide. On a consideration of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not consider it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The prayer for anticipatory bail is accordingly rejected. - 2 - However, rejection of the prayer for anticipatory bail shall not prejudice the petitioner if he surrenders and prays for bail in the court below wherein he will be at liberty to raise all points and the court below shall consider the same on their own merits. S. Pandey ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )